Doesn't surprise me he said that, whether it was on his own or his lawyer told him to say it.  Already tells you what a dirtbag he is.

Seems like his lawyer is a dirtbag also.

Btw, on the record I never liked Alec Baldwin but that's irrelevant.  But still.....

I didn't have an opinion of him other than his work on film until he started telling us all how to think regarding political issues.  That's when he moved to my "Rich Hollywood Hypocrite" list.

Ever since then, I only expected him to say stupid crap in public.  So far, he's not disappointed!   

I didn't have an opinion of him other than his work on film until he started telling us all how to think regarding political issues.  That's when he moved to my "Rich Hollywood Hypocrite" list.

And the political hypocrite list.  Dr. Biden was reading a book to kids with no mask on, and some kid yelled STFU.

The other Biden in a store with a mask required sign and no mask on. The best part was the pic taken was in view of him maskless and the mask required signage.

And the political hypocrite list.  Dr. Biden was reading a book to kids with no mask on, and some kid yelled STFU.

Can’t say if this is UN modified or not….

https://twitter.com/3sidedstory/status/1465441995443240968?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1465446628932788229%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es3_&ref_url=

"I never pressed the trigger". Sounds like his lawyer told him what to say.

If he states this in a civil trial, and the statement is proven to be false, it does not matter what a lawyer tells him to say. It will be perjury, and that will lead to jail time. The big question will be, can the gubmint or expert witness prove that the gun could not fire without a trigger pull?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/lawyer-backs-up-baldwin-s-assertion-he-didn-t-pull-trigger/ar-AARogzx

If he states this in a civil trial, and the statement is proven to be false, it does not matter what a lawyer tells him to say. It will be perjury, and that will lead to jail time. The big question will be, can the gubmint or expert witness prove that the gun could not fire without a trigger pull?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/lawyer-backs-up-baldwin-s-assertion-he-didn-t-pull-trigger/ar-AARogzx

Unless there is video of the incident, it would be impossible to prove other wise.  So the fact that he's making this statement, tells me there is no video and he's just trying to cover his a$$.

At a minimum Alec Baldwin and the others involved should be charged with negligent homicide and sentenced to prison. It's your responsibility to check the weapon when you accept it.

I was watching a Scared Straight episode and 1 guy got 5 years in jail because he fell asleep at the wheel and killed someone.  I don't remember what state this was in, but point is he was convicted.

Unless there is video of the incident, it would be impossible to prove other wise.  So the fact that he's making this statement, tells me there is no video and he's just trying to cover his a$$.

Unless a lab can recreate the "gun just went off without anyone causing it" theory, the results (gun fired) prove the requisite action occurred (someone pulled the trigger).

At a minimum Alec Baldwin and the others involved should be charged with negligent homicide and sentenced to prison. It's your responsibility to check the weapon when you accept it.

You just want to skip the trial and go straight from "charged" to "sentenced to prison?"

Who taught you about due process and the Constitution?  You've already convicted them without knowing all the facts.

Unless there is video of the incident, it would be impossible to prove other wise.  So the fact that he's making this statement, tells me there is no video and he's just trying to cover his a$$.

Not being a Baldwin supporter, just devils advocate.

Being this was a western, they are probably using single action army revolvers. If he cocked the hammer part way and his thumb slipped, the gun can and will go off without a trigger pull. He could be technically telling the truth.

This still is no excuse, IMO, for unsafe gun handling.

Not being a Baldwin supporter, just devils advocate.

Being this was a western, they are probably using single action army revolvers. If he cocked the hammer part way and his thumb slipped, the gun can and will go off without a trigger pull. He could be technically telling the truth.

This still is no excuse, IMO, for unsafe gun handling.

Good to know. Which would mean he still caused the pistol to fire.  Ban all revolvers in westerns. Cowboys must use semi auto or full. Like in time cop.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

“I never pressed the trigger……I just touched it.”
If it was a Smith and Wesson anyway. (Dig at Stangz and his Ruger love) 

 

We can have a trial and if the facts show that he did not check the weapon or did not control the muzzle (it does not matter if he pulled the trigger or not).That is negligence.  We do need to determine the level of negligence and if it was negligence or murder. We need a trial to evaluate the facts, prosecute the charge and determine sentencing.

It's been a long and stressful week.  But I read a "death" in between those two words on a quick read through that response.   

 

I wonder if the revolver has a transfer bar safety.  bc if it does, you would need to pull the trigger for it to fire.  dropping the hammer, it won't fire if it has the transfer bar safety

i believe this is the gun which does have a transfer bar safety

[SNIP]

I wonder if the revolver has a transfer bar safety.  bc if it does, you would need to pull the trigger for it to fire.  dropping the hammer, it won't fire if it has the transfer bar safety

Ruger was an early adopter of safety in the single action revolvers they made. They converted the early single actions to a safer action free of charge. While some said it ruined the feel of the trigger, it could be made to feel the same as before the modification. If I purchased a Ruger single action revolver from the early period I would prefer the action was modified to the safer action. I am sure you know this Ruger history better than I do.

My understanding of the Colt SAA revolvers is that they cannot be modified to a safer action. I could be wrong, but that is my understanding. So it should always be carried with 5 in the cylinder and the hammer down on the empty cylinder. Once you physically start to cock it the cylinder turns to a loaded chamber. So in other words, it should never be cocked (even half cocked) unless you intend for it to be fired.

Most or all other SAA clones and modern SA revolvers are all made with the transfer bar safety action. While modern SA revolvers are safe from accidental discharge, SA revolvers are known for having nice crisp triggers that don’t require a lot of pressure to let off the hammer. Even modern double action revolvers should be carried with the hammer down until you are ready to fire them. JMHO

If you are not familiar as to how SA revolvers work, you need to learn before you own one.

I remember watching a vid on Marine weapons training.  They often use cartridges that have a hole drilled at the base of the brass.  This way it shows there is no powder in there.  So said cartridges still have the head attached to the brass casing.  Wonder if Hollywood would start to require this for all real looking ammo that is used.  Like when WW2 movies are on, the  clip for a Garand that is attached to a sling has heads attached to the brass.  And if you watch closely, when the actor is shooting the Garand and reloading, you see blanks (no heads) being loaded into the rifle.

Alec Baldwin has killed more people than Omicron...