Alec Baldwin claimed that he did not pull the trigger on the single action revolver at the center of the Rust shooting. It’s hard to believe and here is why: the single action mechanism requires multi-step manipulation in order to fire.
The best way to explain this is by noting that there are two classes of revolvers: single action and double action. Ironically, the single action requires two actions to be performed in order to fire while a double action requires only one.
More @ Breitbart
I've just one thing to say, as an old sergeant, regarding Alec Baldwin's claim that the Single Action Revolver went off by itself - Bullshit!
ReplyDeleteYep and he's probably following the instructions of his lawyer.
DeleteHe had one of those movie guns. They do magical stuff. I've seen cowboy movies where a Colt 45 single action shoots 15 times without reloading.
ReplyDelete:)
DeleteHe's lying. He's a leftist. Lying is WHAT THEY DO. It's congenital.
ReplyDeleteYou got that right.
DeleteYeah, that's rich.
ReplyDeleteOnce again an inanimate object takes the blame. The level of stupidity required to accept that statement as fact alone should be enough to commit someone.
As has been stated many times and ways regarding this matter, there were MULTIPLE mistakes made in the safe handling of that firearm. Dodging the responsibility for it, due to ignorance or hubris, is reprehensible. To suggest something inert and inanimate took action all on its own however, is just plain stupid.
To suggest something inert and inanimate took action all on its own however, is just plain stupid.
DeleteAny lie will do to further their cause.
He is a lying sack of shit!
ReplyDeleteWell, he's a commie. :(
DeleteOne caution- it is possible to fire the 1873 Colts and reproductions without pulling the trigger. If there is a live round in the chamber under the hammer, a blow to the hammer will fire it. It doesn't take much of a bump, either. This is why you only load five rounds, and let the hammer down on the empty chamber. Newer designs, like recent Ruger Blackhawk models, have a transfer bar to prevent this. Baldwin was still responsible for checking it to see if it was loaded, and being careful to not point it at anyone.
ReplyDeletenot point it at anyone
DeleteThanks but how do you not when it is required for the scene?
WAS it required for the scene? I've never read anywhere (even in all the "Hollywood is different, plus actors are stupid, so normal rules don't apply to them" apologia) that Baldwin was supposed to be pointing the gun at the camera/DP.
DeleteOn a related but separate note, I'm very surprised that there is not a way to operate the camera remotely exactly for situations where the operator would be at high risk of harm if sitting directly behind or otherwise proximal to camera.
Finally, shouldn't Alec Baldwin just STFU for now? IANAL, but I can't believe his near-continual mouthing off is helpful to his case.
Finally, shouldn't Alec Baldwin just STFU for now? IANAL, but I can't believe his near-continual mouthing off is helpful to his case.
DeleteAgreed.
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2021/12/03/alec-baldwin-admits-he-cocked-the-gun-before-fatal-rust-set-shooting/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20211203
ReplyDeleteA contrarian view:
ReplyDelete.
What if eliminating the camera operator is the goal?
What did the camera see?
What do the persons ordering the murder *think* the camera recorded?
.
Who ordered alec baldwin to execute the camera operator?
What if the target was the injured person (director?), but alec baldwin is such an incompetent addled nincompoop, he executed the wrong individual?
.
That is hollywood, I automatically presume nothing is as it seems.
.
And the child sex-slave trial of maxwell trundles on, its verdict established years before she was arrested.
I welcome your rebuttal.
What if?
DeleteReminds me of the video that got Andrew Napolitano fired.