Truly I read that the armorer for the movie is young and had only led one other production so I wonder if her inexperience played a role. It also sounds like there were other problems on set before this happens that made it seem like it wasnt a well run production.

I read that the union crew walked off set the day before and they were running with quickly-hired non-union locals. The pitch hit "armorer" would not likely have known the standard protocol.

I don't think this was a replacement armorer, but from what I read this is only the 2nd big production where she has done.

There have been reports that there were 2 accidental discharges previously during the production, no one was injured, but it doesn't sound like there were any changes to what they were doing.

I think that it is very clear that basic prop gun safety procedures were not followed here, made worse by the fact that there were previous incidents that did not cause the crew/director to establish better procedures.

One article I read claimed that the assistant director just picked the gun up off of a prop table and gave it to Alec Baldwin. No one cleared the gun for use. The gun should not have been on a prop table, and the armorer should have been on scene to clear the gun, give it to the actor, then take it back and clean it/lock it up after the scene.

Yeah, reading the descriptions of the AD's behavior on-set, I can imagine that, even if the armorer was trying her best, if no one was backing her up on safety, it's easy/possible to get steamrolled by assholes like that, especially as a younger woman.

Ugh.

Producers on the set of Rust cut significant corners when it came to safety protocols and working conditions, according to those who were involved and familiar with the project.

I realize I know virtually nothing about this, but is there a reason to have live ammunition on a set?

That's what I was thinking, Todd.

I think Trudy is going to be our best source of information on this, but from the articles I've read about this incident, even blanks are considered "live ammunition," because they still involve the use of gunpowder.

Producers on the set of Rust cut significant corners when it came to safety protocols and working conditions, according to those who were involved and familiar with the project.

Was Alec Baldwin also a producer of this film? That's not great for him.

Yeah, someone commented that actor Alec Baldwin was not at fault...PRODUCER Alec Baldwin, on the other hand...

I agree that Trudy will know best.

There are benefits to having things be as real as possible onset. If you've seen an actor swinging around a clearly empty cup of "coffee" or an unconvincing cgi location, you get the idea.

There are strict protocols for safe firearms handling on-set (and onstage, for that matter) when they are followed, it's pretty safe. It's when people get sloppy that things go wrong, and this was clearly a sloppy production.

On the issue of "live" ammo. One of the two exemplars of on-set deaths was an actor who was fooling around with a gun loaded with a blank. He put it up to his head and pulled the trigger. The explosion force went down the barrel, which was empty, but rather than dissipating into the air, as it would have in the planned scene, it ran into his skull at the end and pushed a chunk into his brain.

IMO, the moral of the story is not "ban dangerous things" as anything can be dangerous if mishandled but, rather, the absolute need for safety protocols in line with the level of risk in a given scenario. Discipline is hard, and takes time (=$) and isn't fun (unless you're into that sort of thing) but it's the thing that makes the fun possible.