• FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    5 months ago

    Then your analogy sucks. This wasn’t a random failure.

    As I said in the reply: Baldwin knew- or should have known- that he was handling the firearm unsafely, and that he shouldn’t handle it in an unsafe manner,

    • APassenger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      No. But with the withheld evidence now known… The armorer herself may not have been convicted and she’s certainly getting retried.

      Those mistakes didn’t happen in a vacuum. But proving where that vacuum came from doesn’t have the same certainty that it did.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That’s just it.

        It doesn’t matter.

        Baldwin had a duty of care to know. He didn’t know. And now someone is dead. Had he taken the 30 seconds to clear the firearm, “oh there’s something chambered. armorer identify these!” (Or taking one out and checking himself, cuz it’s that kind of production, I guess….”hey this doesn’t rattle!”)… Alina would probably be alive today.

        While HGR does have blame as the armorer who allowed abysmally bad safety practices; she’s not alone in that blame.

        And the other guy who pled out. Him too.

        The only way they could get out of it is if the prop cartridges were so realistic that you can’t tell them apart. At all. And for obvious reasons no prop company will ever produce such cartridges.

        • APassenger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          According to the affidavit, Halls said he did not check all cylinder chambers, but he recalled seeing three rounds in the cylinder at the time. (After the shooting, Halls said in the affidavit, Gutierrez-Reed retrieved the weapon and opened it, and Halls said that he saw four rounds which were plainly blanks, and one which could have been the remaining shell of a discharged live round.)[44] In the warrant, it is further stated that Halls announced the term “cold gun”, meaning that it did not contain live rounds.[42] Halls’s lawyer, Lisa Torraco, later sought to assert that he did not take the gun off the cart and hand it to Baldwin as reported, but when pressed by a reporter to be clear, she refused to repeat that assertion.[45]

          It’s Wikipedia, but it matches what I’ve read elsewhere. He was told he had a cold gun. There is a division of responsibility and what’s described doesn’t match your assertion.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            You can’t “divide” duty of care.

            Even if he doesn’t have to behave in a personally safe manner, he had no personal knowledge. He was told something literally second hand.

            He had an obligation- not as an actor, or producer, but as a person holding a firearm- to behave safely. He did not.

            • APassenger@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              And you can have those moral convictions.

              I’m not sure that’s how it would be viewed in the eyes of the law, which has been the basis of my replies.

              • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                4 months ago

                My convictions?

                Go read the freaking law. It’s pretty self explanatory. Show me where it says people are allowed to act unsafely because somebody else told them it was okay. I’ll wait.

                • APassenger@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Naw.

                  I’m here for discussion, not argument. But you can post your first citation in this thread. I’ve already done one.

                  You’ve used a lot of words, made a lot of assertions but followed few of the standards of civil debate.

                  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    Manslaughter

                    Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice.
                    (snip. this section is about voluntary manslaughter)
                    B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.

                    Whoever commits involuntary manslaughter is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

                    Seriously Already linked it in the comments. Or you could just look up ‘new mexico manslaughter’ on google.

                    So. where’s your sources?