Alec Baldwin May Not Have Pulled Trigger
in Deadly Shooting On ‘Rust’ Set: DA
New York Post,
by
Patrick Reilly
Original Article
Posted By: Black Conservative Voice,
2/20/2022 6:41:37 AM
Alec Baldwin may have fired the shot that killed “Rust” cinematographer Halyna Hutchins without pulling the gun’s trigger, a New Mexico prosecutor says.
Santa Fe District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies told Vanity Fair she had watched Alec Baldwin’s bombshell interview with ABC in December and was drawn to the actor’s claim that he did not pull the trigger.
“You can pull the hammer back without actually pulling the trigger and without actually locking it,” Carmack-Altwies said. “So you pull it back partway, it doesn’t lock, and then if you let it go, the firing pin can hit the primer of the bullet.”
Reply 1 - Posted by:
singermom9 2/20/2022 6:52:48 AM (No. 1077218)
Riiight the gun just "went off". Amazing.
51 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
HPmatt 2/20/2022 7:04:03 AM (No. 1077225)
The DA is elected right? Suppose the elected NM AG co7ld prosecute…..
13 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 2/20/2022 7:18:28 AM (No. 1077229)
This supposition doesn't negate the fact that it was his own action that killed the woman.
64 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
philsner 2/20/2022 7:20:30 AM (No. 1077230)
Next they will say the gun pointed itself at the victim.
67 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
padiva 2/20/2022 7:32:03 AM (No. 1077238)
An adult accepts responsibility
49 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
slipstik 2/20/2022 7:41:11 AM (No. 1077242)
You can split all the straws you want. Mr. Baldwin aimed a LOADED gun at another person and fired it. Never run with scissors, never play with a loaded gun. Simple truths.
You wanna play with a gun, get a squirt gun.
62 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Island Life 2/20/2022 7:44:12 AM (No. 1077246)
Thanks for the info OP.
17 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Rand Al'Thor 2/20/2022 7:55:31 AM (No. 1077255)
Well...he's still a dumba$$, and still negligent to the level of criminality.
33 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
ROLFNader 2/20/2022 7:55:46 AM (No. 1077256)
I think his defense might somehow try to use this as the reason that the gun went off. When I was a kid, one of my favorite toys of ALL time was my Mattel "Fanner 50". You could shoot all six cartridges by pulling the hammer back with the side of your free hand- as was often portrayed in westerns. I think you held the trigger part way back while 'fanning' it. Can't really remember clear back to 1959 ,but it ranked right up there with one of the best Christmas presents EVER!
23 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
BarryNo 2/20/2022 7:56:49 AM (No. 1077257)
Alec just continues to prove he's an irresponsible selfish moron.
45 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
RCFLyer98 2/20/2022 7:58:28 AM (No. 1077258)
Hmmm . . . pretty simple to me. Baldwin was holding the gun when it fired. Repeat . . . Baldwin was holding the gun when it fired. No sugar coating, Baldwin was holding the gun when it fired, killing Halyna!
48 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Bluefindad 2/20/2022 8:11:54 AM (No. 1077270)
I can hear my Dad's instructions from years ago, "Always treat a gun as if it is loaded and can go off at any moment. Never point a gun at another person unless you intend to shoot them."
34 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Lucky5 2/20/2022 8:19:42 AM (No. 1077275)
Left wing mantra-Guns kill people, not people.
10 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Speedy2 2/20/2022 8:23:50 AM (No. 1077282)
Baldwin should be in jail. Such a double standard.
26 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
volksford 2/20/2022 8:25:05 AM (No. 1077283)
Ditto O P .
5 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
NamVet70 2/20/2022 8:39:14 AM (No. 1077296)
There are degrees of culpability, as there are a range of possible charges. Not every death due to human action is murder. Without malice and intent then causing a death by committing a stupid thoughtless act is manslaughter. An idiot who accidentally discharges a weapon and causes a death can be found guilty of manslaughter and pay with some years of prison time, but apparently some fellow elites plan to exempt Mr. Baldwin from such a penalty. Fortunately for Mr. Baldwin he is not a police officer and his victim is not a person of color.
17 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Ebenezer 2/20/2022 8:40:37 AM (No. 1077297)
OP makes a good point. In TV and movie Westerns, shooters were usually shown firing six rounds from their "six shooters". Historians of that time period knew that most people who carried six shooters loaded only five rounds, keeping the chamber on which the hammer rested empty for the reason OP mentioned. Well done, sir. In my opinion, this doesn't relieve Baldwin of responsibility. As the producer it was his job to hire a competent armorer who knew how those weapons worked. He also should NEVER have pointed the gun at her without checking it first.
12 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
KevinSeattle 2/20/2022 8:47:43 AM (No. 1077300)
Didn't the gun fire twice? Just asking.
3 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
mifla 2/20/2022 8:48:46 AM (No. 1077301)
Alec, over the years you have criticised, maligned, and generally bad mouthed people you disagreed with. You are being treated the same way you have treated people. Learn from this.
15 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
bigfatslob 2/20/2022 8:56:01 AM (No. 1077310)
I collected and still have those old Colt and Colt clones today. The single action six shooter has to cycle completely for the bullets to align and exit the barrel. If the cylinder is moving and not locked in the bolt stop it won't fire, there is no halfway. Baldwin had to pull the hammer all the way to battery if he didn't pull the trigger then the trigger spur (tip) was broken off but Baldwin held the firearm and it fire whether he pulled the trigger or not.
9 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
franq 2/20/2022 9:01:01 AM (No. 1077315)
A distinction without a difference. So why did he pull the hammer back? There was only one reason the gun went off - Alec Baldwin's handling of it.
22 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
Mr C 2/20/2022 9:29:37 AM (No. 1077339)
OF COURSE the Bald one is NOT responsible....NO LIBERAL EVER IS!
13 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
Catfur27 2/20/2022 9:31:12 AM (No. 1077341)
...sounds like The Fix is being set up...some of baldwin's influential lib friends have got to the lib prosecutors...." Yes..its a shame that poor girl is dead ..pity....BUT...the BIG picture is that we need people like alex ( sic) to continue the fight against the evil Trumpsters !"
13 people like this.
So, he may get off criminally, but NOT civilly. He's being sued by the deceased's family as we speak, and he will lose!
17 people like this.
Reply 25 - Posted by:
red1066 2/20/2022 9:47:29 AM (No. 1077353)
Baldwin still pointed the gun at someone. A gun safety no no. Even if he had or hadn't had his finger on the trigger or hammer, the gun was still pointed at someone, and there was still a real live round in the chamber.
11 people like this.
Reply 26 - Posted by:
cheeflo 2/20/2022 9:51:50 AM (No. 1077360)
An this mitigates his culpability ... how?
9 people like this.
Reply 27 - Posted by:
Laotzu 2/20/2022 9:52:33 AM (No. 1077362)
When the next campaign contribution reports trickle in we'll know who paid for the DA's willful ignorance.
4 people like this.
Reply 28 - Posted by:
sw penn 2/20/2022 10:02:20 AM (No. 1077372)
Again.
Again the system produces whatever preposterous nonsense
necessary to absolve the rich.
15 people like this.
Reply 29 - Posted by:
janjan 2/20/2022 10:03:33 AM (No. 1077374)
Baldwin had the gun. Baldwin pointed it at people he did not intend to shoot. Baldwin is responsible.
10 people like this.
Reply 30 - Posted by:
FunOne 2/20/2022 10:05:51 AM (No. 1077377)
BAD GUN! BAD GUN!
I have had firearms in my house for over seven decades. I can attest that all of the firearms I have come in contact with were well-behaved. Even when loaded with ammunition, they never initiated an attack on anyone. Admittedly, they never swept the floor or emptied the dishwasher, but they were clearly SAFE tools to have around the home. They could only become unsafe if a person ignorant or inexperienced with handling firearms were to put their hands on them.
I would really hate to see an innocent revolver go to prison for manslaughter instead of Alec Baldwin--as the liberals would support given their rationale on firearms and liberal actors.
15 people like this.
Reply 31 - Posted by:
Vaquero45 2/20/2022 10:19:22 AM (No. 1077394)
This is a load of crapola.
Old-style single action revolvers have to have the hammer cocked all the way back to fire. If the hammer isn’t cocked all the way back, the next cartridge in the cylinder won’t line up into position so that the firing pin on the hammer contacts the primer in the cartridge to set it off. It was true 150 years ago, and it’s still true today.
Baldwin can dissemble all he wants. It won’t change the fact that he, alone, is responsible for the death that resulted from his gross negligence.
14 people like this.
Reply 32 - Posted by:
Strike3 2/20/2022 10:32:09 AM (No. 1077406)
The hammer/firing pin configuration may be a factor but who pointed the gun at it's target?
6 people like this.
Reply 33 - Posted by:
JHHolliday 2/20/2022 10:35:00 AM (No. 1077408)
OP is correct. If this was a modern replica, it won't fire half-cocked. It has a transverse safety bar that prevents it. Your finger could slip while cocking it, but it won't fire. I can't imagine that they would be using original Colts in a movie. Some originals sell for eye-watering amounts. I had a Ruger Vaquero several years ago and it was fail-safe in that regard. It was in .44 magnum and I had to sell it when it got too much for my arthritic hand. Like a lightening bolt hitting the end of your arm. Baldwin probably had it fully cocked with his finger on the trigger (another safety violation) and maybe it had a light trigger pull. He is responsible along with whover allowed a "hot" gun on set..
7 people like this.
Reply 34 - Posted by:
czechlist 2/20/2022 10:38:03 AM (No. 1077409)
so Baldwin's gun went off half cocked just like his mouth
11 people like this.
Reply 35 - Posted by:
stablemoney 2/20/2022 10:44:11 AM (No. 1077415)
The effort to invent something to let the leftist Baldwin go free begins. Baldwin will move into his new home, and will spend some of his money to payoff the relatives, and that will be the end of it.
5 people like this.
Reply 36 - Posted by:
NYbob 2/20/2022 10:59:55 AM (No. 1077440)
The world is stupid enough and the media is slimy enough to believe anything. Even something as simple as how a revolver works. Baldman's defense is he was waving the gun around, pointing it at the cinematographer to show her how it would look in the scene and it 'went off.' Because as a veteran actor, who has handled hundreds of pistols in many movies, he somehow forgot every rule of using a weapon in a movie. He pulled the trigger or pulled back the hammer, but he activated it. NO reason to do that if all you wanted to see was how it looked when he looked into the camera. He can rightfully put some blame the idiot in charge of controlling weapons on set, but the ultimate responsibility is on him and he knows that. Anyone who agrees with him is a fool and excusing manslaughter and criminal negligence.
5 people like this.
Reply 37 - Posted by:
moebellini3 2/20/2022 11:02:40 AM (No. 1077445)
Question, so why is he pulling the hammer back. In many old westerns you see cowboys firing their guns by using the palm of their hand to pull back the hammer and firing off shots in rapid fashion. This claim is only meant to confuse the situation to help Alec Baldwin out of a very tough spot. This guy will claim ignorance while people know he has been in enough westerns to know how to handle a six shooter.
1 person likes this.
Reply 38 - Posted by:
lakerman1 2/20/2022 11:26:05 AM (No. 1077478)
I watched a Jimmy Stewart movie last night, Bend In The River, where easterners were traveling to Oregon, mid 1800-s, to set up farms in Oregon. Stewart played a reformed criminal - unusual part for him - and there were lots of pistol shootouts.
And when Jimmy was shooting the bad guys, he was fanning the hammer on his 6 shooter.
Those early revolvers were single action - the shooter had to pull back on the hammer for each shot. And part the myth of the West, but maybe true, is that cowboys loaded 5 of the 6 chambers with live rounds, but would roll up a ten dollar bill,. and insert it into the empty chamber - to pay their own funeral cost.
One of my pistols is a Colt Detective Special, 38 special, 6 shots. When I carry it, I keep the cylinder under the hammer empty, even though it is a double action. I am super careful.
As far as Baldwin is concerned, and his movie, he aimed the pistol at the camera, at the direction of his cinematographer. She wanted a dramatic film of the loaded pistol pointed directly at her camera. She called the shot - no pun intended. The problem was that she could see the bullet tips, looking directly into the front of the pistol, so the specially crimped blank cartridges would show up on the film. So the inexperienced armorer may have responded to the request to make up some blanks without the crimps, for realism. And she made a mistake.
Who is criminally liable? The armorer, in my opinion, which I value highly. Who shares criminal guilt with her? Alec Baldwin the producer, but not Alec Baldwin the actor.
Who else shares tort liability? Baldwin the producer, the dead cinematographer, and the assistant director, who was wounded - he lined up the shot.\
Finally, watch some reruns of Gunsmoke. Take careful note of how pistols are aimed slightly to the side of their opponent. There is a flattening effect on film, sort of hiding that shot to the side, but a close look will show it to you.
Criminal charges? involuntary manslaughter would be appropriate.
2 people like this.
Reply 39 - Posted by:
Hermit_Crab 2/20/2022 11:30:52 AM (No. 1077483)
The check cleared.
1 person likes this.
Reply 40 - Posted by:
Dino Sayer 2/20/2022 11:31:09 AM (No. 1077484)
If this is what he did, the gun is over a hundred years old.
But that’s not important. We will find that he did not pull the trigger, he did not point the gun, he was not even there, he was not in the state, he was receiving Europes award for talking shoot to gun owners in front of thousands of people at the time the gun pointed itself at the victim and went off by itself.
3 people like this.
Reply 41 - Posted by:
JrSample 2/20/2022 11:44:33 AM (No. 1077499)
“I didn’t know too much about guns, certainly not about 1850s-era revolvers. So when I first heard that, I was like, ‘Oh, that’s crazy,’ ” she told Vanity Fair.
One... we are not dealing with an 1850s era cap and ball revolver. It is a modern replica of a model 1873 Colt single action cartridge firing revolver.
Two.... I am knowledgeable and experienced in the use of both [50 years]. Unless the firing mechanism has been modified, a single action revolver will not fire if the hammer is partially drawn and released, it will drop to half-c---k. There is an audible ''click-clack-clock'' sound when a colt single action is brought to full c---k position. Some can be modified to a hair trigger where slight pressure will cause the revolver to fire, this should not be the case in a weapon used as a movie prop.
three... A colt single action will fire from full-c---- without the trigger being ''pulled'' if the trigger is held down during the ''click-clack-clock'' and the hammer released by the thumb. That is how gunfighters fanned the hammer to rapid fire while holding the trigger down.
To confirm her claims, she'd have to reproduce the process repeatedly in testing and in court. Unless the weapons was modified, it will not do this. I have tried it with my own and it does not work that way.
[I had to mispell a word as c----k' because this sight thinks that the word I was using is nasty, when it is actually the correct word the English language that is used in regards to bringing a firearm mechanism to the firing position. Idiots. ]
2 people like this.
Reply 42 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 2/20/2022 12:19:10 PM (No. 1077517)
There are numerous parts to gun safety on a movie set. It sounds like the party atmosphere allowed live ammo to be loaded into the gun. Someone else was responsible for that. OK.
Baldwin's responsibility was to threat the weapon (all weapons) as if it were loaded and dangerous. Instead he was playing with the trigger or hammer and pointing it at a person. His action was not a part of the script. He was carelessly fiddling around with the gun and caused it to go off. His carelessness also caused it to be aimed at a person.
Sounds like involuntary manslaughter, "an improper use of REASONABLE CARE or skill while in the commission of a lawful act ", to me.
1 person likes this.
Reply 43 - Posted by:
DVC 2/20/2022 12:21:30 PM (No. 1077518)
Bullshirt. He had to pull back the hammer and pull the trigger. If you pull back the hammer, and the trigger is not pulled, the hammer has a halfcock notch which catches the hammer, specifically designed to prevent this exact sort of accident.
The way the Colt Single Action Army model works is extremely simple and clear. This was a modern replica of that design, and all that I know of work the same way.
He manually cocked the hammer and pulled the trigger. Perhaps he didn't INTEND to, but if he hadn't done those two actions, the gun could not have fired.
1 person likes this.
Reply 44 - Posted by:
DVC 2/20/2022 12:27:30 PM (No. 1077524)
Re OP comment:
I have seen a video of a person with the exact model Pietta replica of the Colt 1873 testing the "bang the hammer" theory. He beat on the hammer, with the firing pin resting on a live primer, gun pointed downrange while he beat on the hammer with the only thing he had handy. a heavy steel AK magazine. The mags weigh a pound or so and are heavy thick steel. No firing was possible. A long enough drop, say from horseback height, and hitting the hammer on a rock, very well could cause a discharge in this situation, but not even pretty serious hammering.
He also attempted to partially retract the hammer, just short of the halfcock notch and let if fall....as designed, at that partial retraction, there is not enough energy in the hammer to fire the cartridge, even when done four or five times on the same cartridge.
Only the full hammer fall from fully back position, which requires the trigger to be pulled, has enough energy to pop the primer, and fire the cartridge.
Sorry, this excuse is BS.
1 person likes this.
Reply 45 - Posted by:
kiwinews 2/20/2022 12:28:10 PM (No. 1077525)
Would the gun have fired without human agency? No. Does pulling the hammer back enable the gun to fire? Yes it does. Did Alec Baldwin pull the hammer back? Yes? Would the gun have fired if he had not done it? No?
Then stop splitting hairs. He shot the woman.
7 people like this.
Reply 46 - Posted by:
Digiconver 2/20/2022 1:30:10 PM (No. 1077564)
He discharged the weapon . How the weapon was discharged (he pulled the trigger; he pulled and released the hammer) is an exercise in semantics.
2 people like this.
Reply 47 - Posted by:
Kumoan 2/20/2022 2:08:26 PM (No. 1077588)
No doubt SDNY will soon begin another investigation of The President and/or his family about this, because Baldwin says he didn't do it, so The President must have...
0 people like this.
Reply 48 - Posted by:
whyyeseyec 2/20/2022 4:29:56 PM (No. 1077683)
We knew from the outset the DA was not going to indict Baldwin. He needed to come up with an excuse to drop the whole thing and this is it, lame as it is, this is it. Same situation as Epstein 'committing suicide' while the cameras weren't working and now some other guy related to the Epstein Disturbance mysteriously committed suicide in jail and once again, the cameras weren't working.
0 people like this.
Reply 49 - Posted by:
Geoman 2/20/2022 4:47:32 PM (No. 1077700)
Most "old West" handguns were single action only, meaning one must pull back the hammer, typically with one's thumb. I tested my vintage single action .357 revolver and found that when pulling the hammer back with my thumb there are three distinct clicks where internal mechanisms are both blocking the firing pin from a hammer strike, placing the hammer in a "half-set" position that also does not allow firing, and the fully set position that requires the trigger to be pulled to fire the weapon. I used the word "set" instead of the proper word for the hammer's pulled back status that rhymes with "clock" and also means "male chicken" but the site's naughty work filter blocked my use of the right word. All bets are off if when you are setting the hammer and your finger is inside the trigger guard. Light pressure on the trigger will enable the gun to fire when one takes their thumb off of the hammer. It is highly possible that a person who does not first check to see if a gun is loaded, as soon as the gun is in the hand, would also be ignorant and careless enough to have their finger inside the trigger guard, touching the trigger. A hallmark of a single action revolver, vs a double action firearm, which requires a longer trigger pull in order to set and release the hammer to hit the firing pin so the gun goes "bang," is that single action guns typically have require very light pressure on the trigger to enable firing. Used properly, the light trigger pull enhances accuracy, as a longer, harder pull causes the barrel to either be pushed to the left or pulled to the right for a right-handed shooter. Baldwin is still responsible for the woman's death, even though the female amorer, responsible for the gun's configuration, may be complicit.
0 people like this.
Reply 50 - Posted by:
doctorfixit 2/20/2022 7:36:28 PM (No. 1077828)
Maybe Baldwin wasn't even on the set, according to the leftist DA doing her best to get the murderer off.
0 people like this.
Reply 51 - Posted by:
watashiyo 2/20/2022 7:47:04 PM (No. 1077839)
I knew it! The gun had a mind of its own and can fire at will! Democrats and the liberal idiots were right.
1 person likes this.
Reply 52 - Posted by:
MickTurn 2/20/2022 10:17:10 PM (No. 1077917)
The Cover up begins...Guns DO NOT shoot themselves!
0 people like this.
Comments:
Back almost 150 years ago, a Colt 45, among other handguns of that time period had the firing pin incorporated into the hammer of the weapon. The problem was if you have the firing pin resting against a live round in the chamber, and if you dropped the weapon, or had pulled back the hammer back halfway and released it, the live round would be fired. That is why a 6 shooter was always loaded with 5 rounds, instead of 6, with the hammer/firing pin resting against an empty chamber to prevent an accidental discharge. Design changes have made this impossible in the past 100 years. So the question is, was Mr. Baldwin holding a circa 1876 revolver, or a modern replica of the weapon? Law enforcement has the weapon in its possession. A simple question to ascertain. Whether he pulled the trigger or not is moot! The gun was in his hand...he's responsible! It may change the charge, but he still is responsible!