It’s shocking and awful but it’s going to never stop repeating. RIP
I've said it before (somewhere on this thread) but Sandy Hook should've been the tipping point. When nothing changed after that it was pretty obvious that nothing ever will.
On the day of that shooting Obama said "we're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."
That was in 2012. What has changed since? The 2 deadliest ever mass shootings in the US happened since then.
Not surprised. Ultimately he did aim a loaded weapon at someone and it was him who pulled the trigger. He may very well not be found guilty but I can't argue with the case being bought to court.
"Another Shootin in America (huh) Eye to eye, station to station Another Shootin in America Hand in hand, across the nation Another Shootin in America"
I have t seen the news yet, but my wife informs me there's been another college shooting, 13 dead?
Why, why, why ,and when will this country learn, I know it's in their constitution, but can't they change it? This is insane.
What exactly iS "in their constitution"? The right to go and shoot a dozen school children? I dont think that IS in the constitution. The right to bear arms and defend oneself and ones family IS in the Constitution..And thank God for that! When the Antifa rioters come to YOUR town and smash everything up, destroy and loot and break down your door and threaten your family what are you going to do ~ tickle them to death?!
The constitution was written in the days when the available firearm was a musket. America is still pretty backward, and it’ll be decades before they grow out of their infantile gun fetish. And when people start trying to blame ‘Antifa rioters’ for everything it’s time for the thread to be moved to the House of Commoners?
Not surprised. Ultimately he did aim a loaded weapon at someone and it was him who pulled the trigger. He may very well not be found guilty but I can't argue with the case being bought to court.
If he was told the weapon was safe then he'll be found not guilty. The gun nuts will scream that he should have checked himself, but if an actor is handed a prop and told it's safe to operate, it's not their job to be an expert in that prop, just to use it as directed by the safety crew. Would be absolutely crazy to hand a gun to an actor, tell them to fire it directly at the camera and be happy to give the actor the sole determination on whether it is safe to do so or not.
Not surprised. Ultimately he did aim a loaded weapon at someone and it was him who pulled the trigger. He may very well not be found guilty but I can't argue with the case being bought to court.
If he was told the weapon was safe then he'll be found not guilty. The gun nuts will scream that he should have checked himself, but if an actor is handed a prop and told it's safe to operate, it's not their job to be an expert in that prop, just to use it as directed by the safety crew. Would be absolutely crazy to hand a gun to an actor, tell them to fire it directly at the camera and be happy to give the actor the sole determination on whether it is safe to do so or not.
True, and I agree he'll use that defence, as he should and more than likely it will be successful. However there does need to be a trial and as the one who fired the gun he needs to go through the due process.
The charge is involuntary manslaughter after all, he's not accused of a deliberate act but it was his hand on the gun so he's on the hook one way or another.
Not surprised. Ultimately he did aim a loaded weapon at someone and it was him who pulled the trigger. He may very well not be found guilty but I can't argue with the case being bought to court.
If he was told the weapon was safe then he'll be found not guilty. The gun nuts will scream that he should have checked himself, but if an actor is handed a prop and told it's safe to operate, it's not their job to be an expert in that prop, just to use it as directed by the safety crew. Would be absolutely crazy to hand a gun to an actor, tell them to fire it directly at the camera and be happy to give the actor the sole determination on whether it is safe to do so or not.
True, and I agree he'll use that defence, as he should and more than likely it will be successful. However there does need to be a trial and as the one who fired the gun he needs to go through the due process.
The charge is involuntary manslaughter after all, he's not accused of a deliberate act but it was his hand on the gun so he's on the hook one way or another.
Not surprised. Ultimately he did aim a loaded weapon at someone and it was him who pulled the trigger. He may very well not be found guilty but I can't argue with the case being bought to court.
And the case against him should be very short in finding him not guilty. An actor on a set, particularly someone like Baldwin who appears in lots of movies where guns are used was completely entitled to believe that a weapon handed to him was safe. A prop. Quite why the movie’s armourer loaded a gun with a live round is frankly beyond explanation.
The video image of that young boy being trained in the use of a weapon is beyond sickening. I doubt it’s unique and proves there is no hope whatsoever of the United States relaxing it’s grip on its gun obsession.
Statistically speaking, the first thing that happens in the US when you buy/receive a gun is that your chance of dying in a gun related incident increases by 30%
Any responsible parent will train their child how to use guns safely. Guns can be dangerous in the hands of children who haven't had the proper training.
"go back to you're own county then! It's in our right for every man, woman and child to own firearms to make sure you lot don't think twice about taking us back again"
Fella I worked with for years took a job with our US operation, his first online training was what to do if an active shooter is on site - a bit different to the briefings on fire extinguishers, client confidentiality etc we used to do in the UK. The saddest part of this is that his new colleagues told him that their kids do similar training at school.
Not surprised. Ultimately he did aim a loaded weapon at someone and it was him who pulled the trigger. He may very well not be found guilty but I can't argue with the case being bought to court.
If he was told the weapon was safe then he'll be found not guilty. The gun nuts will scream that he should have checked himself, but if an actor is handed a prop and told it's safe to operate, it's not their job to be an expert in that prop, just to use it as directed by the safety crew. Would be absolutely crazy to hand a gun to an actor, tell them to fire it directly at the camera and be happy to give the actor the sole determination on whether it is safe to do so or not.
True, and I agree he'll use that defence, as he should and more than likely it will be successful. However there does need to be a trial and as the one who fired the gun he needs to go through the due process.
The charge is involuntary manslaughter after all, he's not accused of a deliberate act but it was his hand on the gun so he's on the hook one way or another.
Not surprised. Ultimately he did aim a loaded weapon at someone and it was him who pulled the trigger. He may very well not be found guilty but I can't argue with the case being bought to court.
If he was told the weapon was safe then he'll be found not guilty. The gun nuts will scream that he should have checked himself, but if an actor is handed a prop and told it's safe to operate, it's not their job to be an expert in that prop, just to use it as directed by the safety crew. Would be absolutely crazy to hand a gun to an actor, tell them to fire it directly at the camera and be happy to give the actor the sole determination on whether it is safe to do so or not.
True, and I agree he'll use that defence, as he should and more than likely it will be successful. However there does need to be a trial and as the one who fired the gun he needs to go through the due process.
The charge is involuntary manslaughter after all, he's not accused of a deliberate act but it was his hand on the gun so he's on the hook one way or another.
Is that like attempted manslauter.😕
No. Attempted involves intent to kill with a defence, no death occurs.
In the case of Involuntarily manslaughter the defendant did not cause the death deliberately or voluntarily. They did not kill the victim intentionally.
Statistically speaking, the first thing that happens in the US when you buy/receive a gun is that your chance of dying in a gun related incident increases by 30%
Statistically speaking, the first thing that happens in the US when you buy/receive a gun is that your chance of dying in a gun related incident increases by 30%
Legally, illegally or just a gun per se?
Just owning a gun. Obviously the statistics are skewed horribly by people involved in illegal activities, whether their guns were obtained legally or not.
Scary scary fact, there's been 50 gun deaths in the UK in the last 12 months, there's been 133 people killed by children with guns in the US in that time
I find 50 gun deaths in uk a surprisingly high amount in 12 months
I read the 55 number in a news article. Trying to find supporting research. Found a home office report stating 35 homicides by firearm last year, so another 20 manslaughter+accidental isn't unrealistic.
Anyway, the point was that toddlers kills as many people with guns in the US as all gun related deaths in the UK.
I have lived in the USA for 30 years in Connecticut and now Massachusetts and have always felt safe when I go out. There are areas to avoid but I have never felt unsafe in a bar. Growing up in London I have seen numerous fights in pubs caused by things as stupid as someone looking at someone the wrong way. The weapon of choice in those fights were beer glasses or bottles and have seen the results of numerous glassings including my brother (30 stitches and scarred for life) and my cousin who got bottled. I even saw a guy pull out an axe in a pub in Abbey Wood. I have never seen that over here. Yet I do not understand the American obsession with guns. I do own an antique shotgun inherited from my father in law but got rid of the ammo a long time ago. It is strange and some of the smartest and nicest people I know do own guns. They say they do it for protection. The government will never pass any tougher gun control laws while these nutcase Republican politicians are around. It’s a sad situation but I live in a beautiful and very safe part of the world…..Cape Cod. I love London but my family is here now.I just hope something will get done for the future of my grandkids.
Isn’t it odd that they’re charging Baldwin, seemingly with the same charge (and potential punishment) as the armourer. What is the point in a film production employing an armourer if the actor has to check the gun hasn’t got a live round in?
unless there’s more than meets the eye (only read limited press TBF) I find this astonishing.
Fella I worked with for years took a job with our US operation, his first online training was what to do if an active shooter is on site - a bit different to the briefings on fire extinguishers, client confidentiality etc we used to do in the UK. The saddest part of this is that his new colleagues told him that their kids do similar training at school.
One of my friends got a job on the board of a large bank in the States and uprooted his family to move there. They bought a house in a nice area just outside NYC. Every evening he likes to go for a run after work. One of his neighbours being kind pulled him to one side and said " Femi please do not do that, if the police see a black man running around here in the evening they are likely to shoot you" After 16 months of living the American Dream which among other things involved his 2 primary school aged children having to go through security in order to get into their school he resigned and returned to the UK. Some kind of "land Of The Free" eh !!
Isn’t it odd that they’re charging Baldwin, seemingly with the same charge (and potential punishment) as the armourer. What is the point in a film production employing an armourer if the actor has to check the gun hasn’t got a live round in?
unless there’s more than meets the eye (only read limited press TBF) I find this astonishing.
Has he been charged as a producer or something? Maybe if he had some overarching responsibility on set, or hired the armourer and she wasn't up to the job etc there's maybe more of an argument to charge him I guess.
If not, charging an actor who is told he's firing something that is safe to fire, the same as actors must do on westerns etc thousands of times, is odd.
Isn’t it odd that they’re charging Baldwin, seemingly with the same charge (and potential punishment) as the armourer. What is the point in a film production employing an armourer if the actor has to check the gun hasn’t got a live round in?
unless there’s more than meets the eye (only read limited press TBF) I find this astonishing.
Has he been charged as a producer or something? Maybe if he had some overarching responsibility on set, or hired the armourer and she wasn't up to the job etc there's maybe more of an argument to charge him I guess.
If not, charging an actor who is told he's firing something that is safe to fire, the same as actors must do on westerns etc thousands of times, is odd.
I presume he's charged because he is the one who physically pulled the trigger and fired the killing shot. No doubt he will use the defence of being told by the suitable parties that it was safe to do so and quite likely this will succeed but I think he's got to be charged as it was his action that lead to the death.
I doubt he'll be found guilty but by the letter of law I guess he has to be charged.
Comments
On the day of that shooting Obama said "we're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."
That was in 2012. What has changed since? The 2 deadliest ever mass shootings in the US happened since then.
"Another Shootin in America (huh)
Eye to eye, station to station
Another Shootin in America
Hand in hand, across the nation
Another Shootin in America"
When I read this thread title?
And when people start trying to blame ‘Antifa rioters’ for everything it’s time for the thread to be moved to the House of Commoners?
The charge is involuntary manslaughter after all, he's not accused of a deliberate act but it was his hand on the gun so he's on the hook one way or another.
that’s fucking outrageous and 100% will only end one way. Thst kids is going to get shot
Probably at least in the top 10
Imagine if a spouse or family member of yours was a teacher in a school, college or university.
You'd always be worried every day whenever they go to work. Will they be coming home?
In the case of Involuntarily manslaughter the defendant did not cause the death deliberately or voluntarily. They did not kill the victim intentionally.
Scary scary fact, there's been 50 gun deaths in the UK in the last 12 months, there's been 133 people killed by children with guns in the US in that time
Anyway, the point was that toddlers kills as many people with guns in the US as all gun related deaths in the UK.
unless there’s more than meets the eye (only read limited press TBF) I find this astonishing.
If not, charging an actor who is told he's firing something that is safe to fire, the same as actors must do on westerns etc thousands of times, is odd.
I doubt he'll be found guilty but by the letter of law I guess he has to be charged.