IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags alec baldwin , gun incidents , shooting incidents

Reply
Old 22nd November 2021, 06:59 AM   #1121
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 43,409
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
So presumably, on the back of the police investigation, you'll be expecting the NM DA's Office to be a) charging Baldwin with the crime on the NM statute book that's equivalent to "negligent manslaughter" or worse, and b) charging nobody else with any criminal act?
Expecting? No. I honestly have no clue how the investigation will turn out. But if it did end in the way you describe, I'd be perfectly alright with the results.
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 08:37 AM   #1122
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 50,044
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Like my mom said when I dropped one of the good china plates: "It's not enough that you didn't mean to. You have to mean not to."

As far as I'm concerned, guns are absolutely a "you have to mean not to" thing. Anything less is willful negligence, and no different from doing it on purpose.
The law recognizes a difference. On purpose would be murder. Negligent homicide (which is still a crime) falls under the category of not meaning not to.

Baldwin may still be on the hook for negligent homicide. It seems very unlikely that he would face murder charges.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 08:45 AM   #1123
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 55,028
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The law recognizes a difference. On purpose would be murder. Negligent homicide (which is still a crime) falls under the category of not meaning not to.

Baldwin may still be on the hook for negligent homicide. It seems very unlikely that he would face murder charges.
Sounds about right.

I distinguish between what I think are the moral/ethical obligations, and what the law actually recognizes or provides for. I'm not really interested in "so you think he should be charged with X crime". I'm more interested in the standard of care we as a society are trying to normalize, as an expectation for gun handling.

I think Baldwin had an ethical responsibility to choose differently than he chose. I'm less concerned about whether this is reflected in the criminal proceedings (if any). I'm more concerned about whether this is reflected in our (collective) interpretation of the event and moral judgement of his choices.

As a shared value of our society, I would like us to agree that anyone who picks up a gun bears full responsibility for what happens next. If Baldwin had internalized that value, nobody would have died that day.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.

Last edited by theprestige; 22nd November 2021 at 08:51 AM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 09:53 AM   #1124
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 43,409
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Sounds about right.

I distinguish between what I think are the moral/ethical obligations, and what the law actually recognizes or provides for. I'm not really interested in "so you think he should be charged with X crime". I'm more interested in the standard of care we as a society are trying to normalize, as an expectation for gun handling.

I think Baldwin had an ethical responsibility to choose differently than he chose. I'm less concerned about whether this is reflected in the criminal proceedings (if any). I'm more concerned about whether this is reflected in our (collective) interpretation of the event and moral judgement of his choices.

As a shared value of our society, I would like us to agree that anyone who picks up a gun bears full responsibility for what happens next. If Baldwin had internalized that value, nobody would have died that day.
I would say, MOST anyone, as there are always exceptions to a rule.

Like in this case...
Originally Posted by KMOV TV
A 2-year-old child accidentally shot his father in the back and killed him Saturday night, police said.

The incident happened around 8:40 p.m. at the 1400 block of Castle Lane. The man was found unconscious and not breathing, police said. Police later confirmed it as a homicide.

Authorities tell News 4 the 2-year-old was handling a rifle when it went off.
https://www.kmov.com/news/2-year-old...29549f030.html

In that case, I'd say who ever was dumb enough to leave a loaded weapon anyplace a 2 year old could reach should be 100% responsible for the results of such a stupid action.
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

Last edited by Mike!; 22nd November 2021 at 09:55 AM.
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 11:03 AM   #1125
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 55,028
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
I would say, MOST anyone, as there are always exceptions to a rule.
Of course. There are always exceptions. Most of them go without saying. The important thing is what rule we adopt as our baseline, and then make exceptions to. As the saying goes, exceptions tell us the rule exists.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 11:15 AM   #1126
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 51,745
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Oh I'd disagree with that. There have been AD's from Glocks for gods sakes. Isn't that what the cop from that bizarre story who shot a psychologist who was trying to help a mentally disabled guy playing with a toy truck in Florida, claimed happened?
It happens enough with glocks that it developed the term Glock Leg.

And in the mentally disabled guy it was not a doctor but a caretaker and he was shot by an ar-15. The cop never claimed it was an accidental discharge though why they tried to arrest when they shot a bystander who was face down on the ground with his hands up is still inciteful to cop mindset. Cop shot someone they must have done something wrong, so detain them and put off first aid for 20 minutes.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 11:25 AM   #1127
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 51,745
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
I've certainly seen AD's in IPSC/IDPA matches. The gun went off before the shooter intended, but they didn't break 180 degrees and there are high berms on the sides of the shooting bay. So they weren't told to go home and never come back.
People are quite clear that that can not happen. So clearly your lying eyes are the problem.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 12:20 PM   #1128
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,658
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
It happens enough with glocks that it developed the term Glock Leg.

And in the mentally disabled guy it was not a doctor but a caretaker and he was shot by an ar-15. The cop never claimed it was an accidental discharge though why they tried to arrest when they shot a bystander who was face down on the ground with his hands up is still inciteful to cop mindset. Cop shot someone they must have done something wrong, so detain them and put off first aid for 20 minutes.
Yeah mea culpa on this one. I thought his story was" oops, didn't mean to shoot him, my finger was on trigger. I haven't the foggiest effing clue why he wasn't arrest for attempted murder on the spot given that his story is he meant to shoot an unarmed person who was no threat to anyone. Oh wait, yes I do, cop privilege.

I can however absolutely guarantee you that its much easier to accidentally pull the trigger on a cocked revolver than a Glock. Which *seems* to now be the story in this case. Baldwin was not purposefully pointing a gun at anyone, he was practicing a draw and he hit the DP who was roughly beside him. IMO that lessens his culpability, since he never even meant to point a gun at someone, add on to the fact that he may have thought it was an inoperable prop and/or thought there was a qualified armorer on set and he's culpability becomes far less than many many negligent shootings that don't result in criminal prosecutions. Kinda my last thoughts on this subject until more facts come out. I can go round and round with others that think he should face prosecution, but we're just arguing over opinions.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 12:21 PM   #1129
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,658
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
People are quite clear that that can not happen. So clearly your lying eyes are the problem.
AD's happen all the time at shooting ranges. As long as you follow safety protocols* they'd never been considered negligent.

*meaning the barrel was pointed downrange in a range hot condition
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 12:47 PM   #1130
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 51,745
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
AD's happen all the time at shooting ranges. As long as you follow safety protocols* they'd never been considered negligent.

*meaning the barrel was pointed downrange in a range hot condition
They are by definition negligent and if they were really following procedure they could never happen, this is taken as gospel by many here, your heresy will not be tolerated.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2021, 07:05 PM   #1131
mgidm86
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,969
About accidental discharges:

Eye pokes happen all the time in MMA and the rules against it are barely enforced. They are always called "inadvertent".

Inadvertent is BS. The referee tells the fighter "control your weapons". If they do not, it is not an accident.

If they penalized fighters every time they did this they would incorporate avoiding eye pokes into their training. But since there are virtually no penalties for a so-called "inadvertent eye" poke, they continue on.

I say virtually no penalties because I saw a fight a few nights ago with three eye pokes by the second round. Same fighter.

The fight was ended as a "no contest" when one fighter couldn't continue due to the eye poking. In my opinion the offending fighter should have been disqualified - referees discretion. He actually should have lost a point after the first one. It's stupid.

So no penalties whatsoever, and the fighter will continue to fight dangerously.

Now you wanna talk about guns? People, as a whole, are too stupid to have guns.
__________________
I'm taking a leave of absence in case anyone notices.



Stop feeding the trolls PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Last edited by mgidm86; 22nd November 2021 at 07:09 PM.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:12 AM   #1132
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 11,079
Looks like this investigation is climbing further up the chain. Apparently the Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office executed a search warrant for a ammunitions supplier in Albuquerque. Per NPR:

Quote:
The warrant says ammo on set came from various sources including a man named Seth Kenney, owner of PDQ Arm & Prop LLC in Albuquerque, for which the warrant was issued. Other pieces of ammo were brought to the set by armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed from a previous production and from another individual named "Billy Ray," the warrant says.
If you can't trust some guy named "Billy Ray" then, dammit, who can you trust? Anyway, it doesn't look like it was Billy's fault. The article gets a bit confusing, but long story short it hints at the ammunitions company giving them incorrect ammo. The armorer's dad is involved as well.

Quote:
Investigators also spoke with the father of the Hannah Gutierrez Reed, Thell Reed, who also works as a set armorer. He called officers and told them he worked with Kenney earlier this year on another movie set.

Thell Reed said he conducted weapons training to actors on a firearms range and Kenney was there. Kenney told the elder Reed to bring additional live ammunition in case the group ran out of rounds during training.

After the day's training was finished, Kenney took all of the ammunition used that day — including some for a .45 caliber Colt. Thell Reed told investigators he tried to get the ammo he brought to the training back from Kenney, but it remained in his possession.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:27 AM   #1133
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 14,494
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
.....
If you can't trust some guy named "Billy Ray" then, dammit, who can you trust? Anyway, it doesn't look like it was Billy's fault. The article gets a bit confusing, but long story short it hints at the ammunitions company giving them incorrect ammo. The armorer's dad is involved as well.
It seems to be well-established that live rounds were mixed with blanks and dummies. That should never have happened, but a competent armorer should have been able to tell the difference.

From the link:
Quote:
Zachry told investigators that when she checked the ammo after the shooting she noted that some of the rounds in their collection "rattled" — which meant they were dummy rounds — and others didn't, according to the warrant.
The rattle means that the powder has been removed and replaced with a BB. No rattle = (probable) live round.

Last edited by Bob001; Yesterday at 09:29 AM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:38 AM   #1134
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 55,028
Seems crappy to try to involve the supplier in this, in any way.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:38 AM   #1135
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 11,079
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It seems to be well-established that live rounds were mixed with blanks and dummies. That should never have happened, but a competent armorer should have been able to tell the difference.
I'll take your word for it.

Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
From the link:


The rattle means that the powder has been removed and replaced with a BB. No rattle = (probable) live round.
It was sneaky enough to get by the prop master and armorer. Like I said, I'll take your word for it, but it's a little odd Zachry noticed it AFTER the shooting rather than before.

Either way, just popped up on my news feed so figured I'd pass it along. I haven't been paying much attention as this doesn't really interest me at all. It's pretty much just people who know stuff about guns deciding who to blame and deciding that pretty much everyone is to blame.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:39 AM   #1136
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 11,079
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Seems crappy to try to involve the supplier in this, in any way.
Did you read the article? The police are the ones looking into it so the supplier had to have had something going on. There appears to be a connection between the armorer, this supplier, and the ammunition sold to them. I'm not sure why it's crappy.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:39 AM   #1137
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 12,162
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Seems crappy to try to involve the supplier in this, in any way.
Seems pro-forma that any other possible explanations for how such a tremendous ****-up occured would be investigated, even if just to deny these implausible explanations as a defense by those who seem to be obviously at fault.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; Yesterday at 09:52 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:06 AM   #1138
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 55,028
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
Did you read the article? The police are the ones looking into it so the supplier had to have had something going on. There appears to be a connection between the armorer, this supplier, and the ammunition sold to them. I'm not sure why it's crappy.
I'm talking more about the article hinting that the supplier might have supplied the wrong ammunition. Why hint at something like that? Why not just say it outright?

And why would it even matter? Getting the wrong ammo is a minor customer service dispute between seller and buyer. Even if the supplier provided the wrong ammo, they're still (in my opinion), nowhere near the chain of events or assumption of responsibility for how that ammo got into the gun.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:09 AM   #1139
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 11,079
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm talking more about the article hinting that the supplier might have supplied the wrong ammunition. Why hint at something like that? Why not just say it outright?
I would assume saying something about someone that isn't factually accurate would cause some type of legal issues?

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
And why would it even matter?
Dunno, good question.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Getting the wrong ammo is a minor customer service dispute between seller and buyer. Even if the supplier provided the wrong ammo, they're still (in my opinion), nowhere near the chain of events or assumption of responsibility for how that ammo got into the gun.
These were reloaded bullets, from what I understand in the article, and so I'm not sure if they reloaded bullets incorrectly, or what could be the issue. From what Bob said, it sounds like it shouldn't matter because there's a rattle or jingle or whatever, but I'm more than likely missing something.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:09 AM   #1140
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 12,162
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm talking more about the article hinting that the supplier might have supplied the wrong ammunition. Why hint at something like that? Why not just say it outright?

And why would it even matter? Getting the wrong ammo is a minor customer service dispute between seller and buyer. Even if the supplier provided the wrong ammo, they're still (in my opinion), nowhere near the chain of events or assumption of responsibility for how that ammo got into the gun.
Indeed, hard to see how even a packaging mishap would negate responsibility for the armorer. The difference between blanks and live ammo should be immediately obvious to any expert doing even the bare minimum level of due diligence.

This whole case has smacked of really desperate, implausible explanations from those who seemed to have obviously failed in their jobs on set and caused a death because of it.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:11 AM   #1141
Warp12
Illuminator
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 3,082
I mean, if you look at a round, and it has a standard bullet in the casing, a clean casing, and an unfired primer...what else would you need to see in order to raise suspicion of it being a live round?

I mean, I think at that point the assumption must be that it is a live round.
__________________
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." - Jesus

Last edited by Warp12; Yesterday at 10:12 AM.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:26 AM   #1142
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 55,028
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
I mean, if you look at a round, and it has a standard bullet in the casing, a clean casing, and an unfired primer...what else would you need to see in order to raise suspicion of it being a live round?

I mean, I think at that point the assumption must be that it is a live round.
From what I've heard so far, I have some doubts that the "armorer" would have known what to look for, or would have recognized a live round if she saw one.

---

My provisional headcanon is something like this:

POLICE: Where did this bullet come from?

PRODUCTION: We buy all our ammo from these guys.

POLICE: We better go talk to these guys.

SUPPLIER: Am I being detained? I don't talk to cops without a warrant.

JUDGE: Okay, fine. Here's a warrant.

POLICE: Do you carry the ammo in question?

SUPPLIER: Yep!

POLICE: Did you do business with the Production?

SUPPLIER: Yep!

POLICE: Is it possible you gave them this ammo instead of the ammo they wanted?

SUPPLIER: Anything is possible, but you'll have to continue this conversation with my lawyer.

POLICE: Thanks, that will be all. You're free to go.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:40 AM   #1143
bobdroege7
Illuminator
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,395
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
I mean, if you look at a round, and it has a standard bullet in the casing, a clean casing, and an unfired primer...what else would you need to see in order to raise suspicion of it being a live round?

I mean, I think at that point the assumption must be that it is a live round.
Well, I would have to pull on the bullet part to make sure it isn't actually a roach clip.
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:43 AM   #1144
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 14,494
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Indeed, hard to see how even a packaging mishap would negate responsibility for the armorer. The difference between blanks and live ammo should be immediately obvious to any expert doing even the bare minimum level of due diligence.
.....
Seems like the first step in a responsible operation would be to insist on sealed packages provided by known commercial suppliers, not "here's this box of bullets we brought back from the range." Even card players use a fresh deck every time, not whatever cards happen to be lying around from last night.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:57 PM   #1145
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 53,257
Now Alec is claiming he did not pull the trigger on the gun.
Somehow I don't think many people will believe him.....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:03 PM   #1146
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 43,409
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Now Alec is claiming he did not pull the trigger on the gun.
Somehow I don't think many people will believe him.....
Hasn't it been established (at least here) that the gun had to be cocked, have the hammer itself pulled back, before the trigger can even be pulled?
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

Last edited by Mike!; Yesterday at 04:06 PM.
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:22 PM   #1147
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 55,028
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Now Alec is claiming he did not pull the trigger on the gun.
Somehow I don't think many people will believe him.....
I guess "throw the armorer under the bus" is the strategy of the day.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:26 PM   #1148
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 5,928
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
Hasn't it been established (at least here) that the gun had to be cocked, have the hammer itself pulled back, before the trigger can even be pulled?
It's possible that is the intended mechanism of action.

But also recall multiple misfires on this set in the weeks before.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; Yesterday at 05:16 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:32 PM   #1149
Warp12
Illuminator
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 3,082
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
It's possible that is the intended mechani of action.

But also recall multiple misfires on this set in the weeks before.
Yeah, so "misfire" can mean a lot of things, I guess. It usually means when the cartridge didn't fire even though the hammer struck.

On a single action, you always must cock the hammer. It is pretty much zero chance this round went off without a hammer strike.
__________________
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." - Jesus
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:15 PM   #1150
Pope130
Illuminator
 
Pope130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,555
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
Hasn't it been established (at least here) that the gun had to be cocked, have the hammer itself pulled back, before the trigger can even be pulled?
No. On a single action, built to the Colt SAA pattern, you can press the trigger first, then pull the hammer back. That will rotate the cylinder and compress the hammer spring, but not engage the sear. If you then release the hammer, rather than lowering it slowly, it will fire.

I can easily picture the actor, practicing the cross-draw, grabbing the grip with all four fingers and pressing the trigger. He then pulls back the hammer and lets go of it with his thumb, expecting the hammer to remain cocked. Instead, the weapon fires.
Pope130 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:16 PM   #1151
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 18,574
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
Expecting? No. I honestly have no clue how the investigation will turn out. But if it did end in the way you describe, I'd be perfectly alright with the results.



But you've already declared that "the fault starts and ends with Baldwin".
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:21 PM   #1152
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 43,409
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post


But you've already declared that "the fault starts and ends with Baldwin".
Well, since my declaration starts and ends here, I really have little, okay, NO control over the end result, no matter how I feel about it. Reading what I said, I don't think I've contradicted myself, but I could be wrong.
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

Last edited by Mike!; Yesterday at 05:23 PM.
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:24 PM   #1153
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 18,574
Originally Posted by Pope130 View Post
No. On a single action, built to the Colt SAA pattern, you can press the trigger first, then pull the hammer back. That will rotate the cylinder and compress the hammer spring, but not engage the sear. If you then release the hammer, rather than lowering it slowly, it will fire.

I can easily picture the actor, practicing the cross-draw, grabbing the grip with all four fingers and pressing the trigger. He then pulls back the hammer and lets go of it with his thumb, expecting the hammer to remain cocked. Instead, the weapon fires.

Yes.

In those quick-fire contests, of course, the contestants do exactly this: they cock and release the hammer as fast as they can, using the hand that's not holding the grip. They never need to pull the trigger - the cock and release does the job of rotating the cylinder and releasing the firing pin.

So as you say, it's entirely possible that Baldwin did exactly as you describe - with his trigger finger nowhere near putting any squeezing pressure on the trigger. Of course it would still be his ultimate responsibility to know how the gun in his hand actually worked: ignorance would not serve him well as a defence.....
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:32 PM   #1154
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 18,574
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
Well, since my declaration starts and ends here, I really have little, okay, NO control over the end result, no matter how I feel about it. Reading what I said, I don't think I've contradicted myself, but I could be wrong.

I.... realise you have no control over the criminal justice process in this case. But since you made a declarative statement, this implies that your expectations are in line with that statement*.


Example:

Person 1: I think the Green Bay Packers are considerably better than any other NFL team this season.

Person 2: So would you be expecting to see the Packers winning the Superbowl this year then?

Person 1: No - I have no clue as to whether the Packers will win the Superbowl or not.


* And, conversely, that you'll be surprised if things don't pan out in line with your declaration.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:32 PM   #1155
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 5,928
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
Yeah, so "misfire" can mean a lot of things, I guess. It usually means when the cartridge didn't fire even though the hammer struck.



On a single action, you always must cock the hammer. It is pretty much zero chance this round went off without a hammer strike.
Forgive my terminology, multiple previous accidental discharges. Since nobody in authority took the multiple complaints about which seriously, it is unknown if it was a defect in the weapon or improper handling.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:32 PM   #1156
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 55,028
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post


But you've already declared that "the fault starts and ends with Baldwin".
What does that have to do with how we expect the investigation and prosecution (if any) to play out?
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:53 PM   #1157
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 18,574
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What does that have to do with how we expect the investigation and prosecution (if any) to play out?

Huh?

To take things away from this specific case and into a generic one:

If Alan declares (directly after the event) "Mr X murdered Mr Y", then there's an obvious implication that Alan expects Mr X to be charged and convicted in accordance with that declaration.

Otherwise, Alan would effectively be saying either:

"Mr X murdered Mr Y, but investigators and courts won't be able to find sufficient evidence to lead to a conviction".

or

"Mr X murdered Mr Y, but Mr X will beat the charges because of corruption/incompetence in the criminal justice system".


But hey-ho........................
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:26 PM   #1158
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 55,028
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Huh?

To take things away from this specific case and into a generic one:

If Alan declares (directly after the event) "Mr X murdered Mr Y", then there's an obvious implication that Alan expects Mr X to be charged and convicted in accordance with that declaration.

Otherwise, Alan would effectively be saying either:

"Mr X murdered Mr Y, but investigators and courts won't be able to find sufficient evidence to lead to a conviction".

or

"Mr X murdered Mr Y, but Mr X will beat the charges because of corruption/incompetence in the criminal justice system".


But hey-ho........................
Murder isn't a generic case, it's a very specific case, with specific provisions in law for prosecution.

Anyway, for me, I have opinions about the ethical responsibility Baldwin had in handling the gun, but I have no idea whether the law provides for prosecution on the basis of the ethical responsibility I see. So while I think that Baldwin is ethically responsible, I have no idea what to expect from the prosecution (if any).

And no, I'm not implying that the state will prosecute, nor am I implying that the state cannot or will not prosecute. I'm implying that I am agnostic about the state's ability and willingness to prosecute, because I don't know enough about the law or the prosecutor to have an opinion.

Is it okay if I think Baldwin is ethically responsible, without having any opinion at all about how the prosecution (if any), might play out?
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:37 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.