Alec Baldwin’s Gun Incident: Sources of Negligence and Safety Failures on Set vs. Shooting Range Protocols

The case against Alec Baldwin involving the accidental fatal shooting on the set of the film 'Rust' has raised many questions regarding safety protocols and practices both on Hollywood sets and shooting ranges. This article delves into the specifics of the charges and the alleged breaches of safety rules, comparing them to similar practices and explaining the intricacies of movie set operations.

The Legal and Ethical Implications

Alec Baldwin has been charged under New Mexico law for involuntary manslaughter. However, the case includes an unconstitutional charge of a mandatory sentencing enhancement that came into law after the incident. The case is further complicated by the appointment of a Special Prosecutor, which may be done when the District Attorney cannot carry out the role herself. Nevertheless, this has also been challenged as unconstitutional as it violates the US and New Mexico constitution's separation of powers.

The Safety Briefings and Training

The case centers around the alleged failure to follow safety rules, which include regular safety briefings for all actors and extras handling firearm props. It is a standard practice for both shooting ranges and movie sets to provide verbal and written acknowledgements of safety rules to anyone on the premises. However, the specifics of this practice vary between environments.

According to accusations, regular safety briefings were only conducted approximately three times in a span of 12 days. Additionally, the SAG actor’s union safety bulletin was not consistently attached to call sheets and was not attended to daily as required. Although these briefings are pivotal, Baldwin has also reported receiving a 90-minute safety training session.

Comparing Movie Set Practice to Shooting Range Protocols

It is crucial not to compare movie set firearm props directly to shooting range procedures. On sets, a wide variety of props are used, ranging from solid plastic lookalikes to real guns firing blanks, all of which must remain free of actual ammunition. The crew and cast work collaboratively in highly specialized teams, akin to an Indy car pit stop, where negligence can have fatal consequences.

This cooperation adds an extra layer of complexity. Just as an Indy car team must perform flawlessly during a pit stop, each member on a movie set bears responsibility for safety. Just as a driver is cautioned about moving too soon during a pit stop, actors must adhere strictly to instructions on set. Inadvertent negligence can occur, as seen in the case of Alec Baldwin, who may have been careless but is not the sole party to blame.

The Rust Industrial Accident

The incident on the 'Rust' set shares a striking parallel with other industrial accidents. Multiple failures and negligence combined to cause the tragedy. The Sheriff’s investigation found that a real round was accidentally mixed in with inert, unfirable rounds, as handled by the armorer. This individual had the job of acquiring, securing, and assessing the safety training needs related to the props, as well as delivering training and ensuring load checks.

However, complications arose during the loading and final check, as the first assistant director (equivalent to the pit crew manager) took over and handled the responsibility of declaring a prop safe. This further highlights the importance of clear responsibilities and protocols on set.

Concluding Thoughts

The Alec Baldwin incident presents a complex ethical and legal dilemma. While the case highlights the importance of strict adherence to safety protocols, it also exposes the potential for multiple points of failure in an industry that demands high precision and time efficiency. The full scope of responsibility lies with multiple parties on a set, each with their own role to play. The separation between movie set procedures and shooting range protocols further underscores the need for tailored safety measures in environments that share but do not entirely overlap in risk and practice.