Blank Firing Gun Kills

[AirSniper]

This is why I do not approve of people bringing blank firing guns to airsoft events for the re-enactment part as they are dangerous, anyone who has had one can tell you that the safety guide makes it very clear that there is a serious risk of injury from flying metal that can get stripped off the casing and ejected at bullet speed velocities.

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by AirSniper

[Shamal]

I had a blank firing m9 and I'm pretty sure barrel was blocked.gases and sparks came from hole drilled in top of slide.🤔

[EDcase]

11 hours ago, AirSniper said:

This is why I do not approve of people bringing blank firing guns to airsoft events for the re-enactment part as they are dangerous, anyone who has had one can tell you that the safety guide makes it very clear that there is a serious risk of injury from flying metal that can get stripped off the casing and ejected at bullet speed velocities.

Film blank prop guns are completely different to publicly available ones. (in UK)

Prop guns have a partial restriction in the barrel to increase back pressure but gas is vented from the barrel like a real gun.

Public sector blank guns vent vertically from a hole in the top of the barrel.

 

I'm going to assume the cause of this accident was similar to that which killed Brandon Lee... (It was the fault of the armourer for not checking the barrel properly)

In one scene they used prop rounds in a magazine or being loaded etc. These may be real round which are inert or plastic ones that look like real bullets.

Unfortunately a plastic bullet came off the shell and stuck in the barrel.

When blanks were used in another scene the plastic bullet was fired and broke apart when it hit the barrel obstruction but the bits that exited still had enough energy to kill at close range.

 

Nothing like this can happen with consumer blank firers except if someone purposely pushed something into the vent hole.  Even then it probably wouldn't have enough energy to cause serious harm.

 

Edited October 23, 2021 by EDcase

[Shamal]

Exactly what we said this morning at work regarding Brandon Lee.

 

 

[EDcase]

I used to have a film prop Uzi and the barrel had a U bend designed into the breech so that there was no linear path for a projectile or debris out of the barrel and it could develop enough back pressure to cycle. (I never got to use it because the blanks weren't available)

 

Edited October 23, 2021 by EDcase

[Rogerborg]

I fully agree that airsoft sites should only have airsoft toys at them.  Even if you know what you've brought, the skip licker who thinks it's funny to pick it up and "pew" it at someone won't.  I include metal pellet air guns in that, I've seen folk shooting them on airsoft ranges.

 

In this case it seems like actual live rounds were loaded (why were there even any on site?) and they'd already had this happen on set, to big shrugs.

 

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set

 

Somebody should be going to jail for that, either the armourer, the AD who said "cold gun", or Baldwin.

 

I hope we'd agree with the basic principle that you should always assume that a gun (airsoft or otherwise) is loaded until you've personally verified otherwise.  Even - and especially - if you're an anti-gun activist like Baldwin.

 

That wasn't an "accident", it was negligence.

[CrackCommandoUnit1972]

Here is an interesting article that mentions how some productions are using airsoft weapons with firing effects added digitally in post production.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/oct/23/totally-preventable-and-shocking-props-masters-talk-on-set-shootings

[hitmanNo2]

Yeah, lots of productions use airsoft in place of blank firers for various reasons.  Be it cost, safety etc.  You can generally tell because it looks absolute shite.  They often don't bother to simulate case ejection and muzzle flashes look like crap.  Though it can be done fairly well if people know what they're doing.  I seem to recall Stargate SG-1 looking pretty OK for the time. 

 

Imo, no dummy/airsoft guns will ever replace proper blank firing adapted guns on screen.  They just don't have the presence.  Imagine Heat shot with airsoft guns.  It just wouldn't have the same impact.

 

Anyway, regarding Alec Baldwin being a murderer, lots of rumours circulating it was an actual firearm with a live round.  Quite what the fuck live rounds and non blank fire adapted firearms are doing on a film set, I don't know.  I'm hearing lots of reports of staff walking out over safety concerns in general as well as firearms safety concerns from previous incidents on set.  I gather some of these staff were replaced with people that were perhaps not qualified to replace who they did.  Whatever happened, it's a big shit show and some people are going to be in a lot of trouble.

 

Perhaps if Baldwin wasn't so rabidly anti gun, he might know the basics of firearms safety...I couldn't imagine pointing even a blank firer at someone I wasn't willing to injure. 

 

Though the memes coming out of this are quite entertaining.  (At Baldwin's expense of course.  Not the poor people he shot)

[EDcase]

I certainly don't think Alec has any responsibility in this incident.

Actors have no requirement for weapon knowledge and being anti-gun we can expect he knows very little.

In fact, armourers prefer when actors do not manipulate the guns on their own.

 

I don't believe a real bullet was involved but if so then one or more people must go to jail for extreme negligence and stupidity.

The only way a real bullet could have been used is if the gun was a revolver because a semi-auto that can fire real ammo would not work with blanks.

 

I haven't checked the latest details but since several people were injured I imagine the projectile broke up exiting the barrel (due to the obstruction) and acted like a shotgun blast of shrapnel.  They would have much less energy than a real bullet but still enough to damage sensitive areas like face and neck.

 

Edited October 23, 2021 by EDcase

[hitmanNo2]

He pointed a firearm at someone and pulled the trigger.  You just don't do that.  Yes, even with a supposed "cold gun", even on a film set.  I don't see how anyone can defend that.

 

Sure, he didn't prep the gun and perhaps he's not legally obligated to check it but he broke a firearm safety rule and someone died.  He is absolutely partially to blame.

[EDcase]

What about all the thousands of films where actors pointed guns at others and fired...

If he wasn't meant to then that's different.  I don't actually know the details.

[hitmanNo2]

Oh.  Perhaps I'm making some assumptions on general knowledge.  On film sets, guns are actually pointed slightly off of actors to negate any armourer failings such as this scenario but mainly to avoid any small amount of debris from the blanks hitting actors.  Then camera angles do the rest and make it seem like everything is lined up.

[Rogerborg]

1 hour ago, EDcase said:

I certainly don't think Alec has any responsibility in this incident.

 

It's a tough one.  It certainly wasn't intentional, and there shouldn't have been a live round anywhere on set.

 

However, actors are not a special category of human being, and they have culpability for their own actions.  "Just following orders" is not a defence, and ignorance shouldn't be either.

 

How long does it take to show-and-tell basic gun safety, and the difference between an inert dummy round, and (a picture of) a live round?

 

It could be done while they're in make-up.  It certainly should be.

 

 

1 hour ago, EDcase said:

Actors have no requirement for weapon knowledge and being anti-gun we can expect he knows very little.

 

If he knows nothing about guns, then he's in a poor position to be making pronouncements about them.

 

And if he's so anti-gun that he refused to learn the basics, then should have refused to use one.

 

It's hard not to conclude that he's a virtue signaller who dropped his principles at the first sniff of a pay cheque.

 

 

1 hour ago, EDcase said:

I don't believe a real bullet was involved but if so then one or more people must go to jail for extreme negligence and stupidity.

The only way a real bullet could have been used is if the gun was a revolver because a semi-auto that can fire real ammo would not work with blanks.

 

It's an 1880s Western, so it would have been a revolver.

 

It seems to have been an actual live round.  It is unfathomable why there would be one anywhere on set, and the armourer is primarily to blame for that. 

 

"The person in charge of overseeing the gun props, known as the armorer, Hannah Gutierrez Reed, could not be reached for comment. The 24-year-old is the daughter of veteran armorer Thell Reed"

 

And a big round of applause for nepotism.  Wamxn's lib, take a bow too.

 

 

1 hour ago, EDcase said:

I haven't checked the latest details but since several people were injured I imagine the projectile broke up exiting the barrel

 

Seems that it was a live round that went right through Ms Hutchins, and into the man standing behind her.

 

From the LA times article above, it seems that he wasn't even supposed to be firing it, it was just a draw scene.  And they'd already had multiple NDs from their prop live guns, although how you'd cause a revolver to fire without pulling the trigger escapes me.  To be as charitable as I can to Baldwin, if the hammer had somehow become cocked (they'd already filmed the scene once), and the trigger was defective (see previous NDs), it might have gone off without being pulled.

 

I do feel considerable sympathy for him, and I'd primarily blame the armourer.  It won't have been in any way intentional, and he is going to have to live with the knowledge that he could have prevented it by checking those rounds.

 

But he could have checked those rounds, and I believe that he should have checked those rounds.

 

 

[lukeB]

3 hours ago, hitmanNo2 said:

Oh.  Perhaps I'm making some assumptions on general knowledge.  On film sets, guns are actually pointed slightly off of actors to negate any armourer failings such as this scenario but mainly to avoid any small amount of debris from the blanks hitting actors.  Then camera angles do the rest and make it seem like everything is lined up.

 

I read that he was shooting into the camera and the woman who was hit was standing behind it with the director.

[EDcase]

Sounds entirely the fault of the armourer, Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

I heard there may have been some illegal procedures going on (probably to cut costs)

 

The actors will be given basic handling and safety instructions but not how to check if a round is live or not.

They practice a scene and then are handed the 'prop' then its ACTION and they do their thing.

 

Absolutely no responsibility on Alecs' part or the actor who killed Brandon Lee.

But they must live with the self imposed guilt.

 

Edited October 23, 2021 by EDcase

[EDcase]

7 hours ago, hitmanNo2 said:

Oh.  Perhaps I'm making some assumptions on general knowledge.  On film sets, guns are actually pointed slightly off of actors to negate any armourer failings such as this scenario but mainly to avoid any small amount of debris from the blanks hitting actors.  Then camera angles do the rest and make it seem like everything is lined up.

Yes, as with punches, weapons can be pointed slightly off target for certain shots but I believe this one was directly in front so would not work that way.

Sometimes for close shots a pane of Lexan is used to protect the target, often the camera itself.

But in this case if a real bullet was involved that wouldn't have helped much.

[Rogerborg]

12 hours ago, EDcase said:

Sounds entirely the fault of the armourer

 

I'd say primarily.

 

12 hours ago, EDcase said:

The actors will be given basic handling and safety instructions but not how to check if a round is live or not.

 

Why not?  Is a question that a prosecutor might be asking very soon.  Actors have hours of idle time.  I can't think of any good reason to not train them, beyond them not wanting to learn anything about icky, scary guns.

 

I understand that you're correct that they're not given sufficient training.  What I'm saying is that this needn't be so, and that it might have to change because of this incident.  Safety regulations are written in blood.  Hot young mother blood in this case.

 

 

 

 

12 hours ago, EDcase said:

Absolutely no responsibility on Alecs' part 

 

We'll see.  I guess it comes down to whether you consider actors to be adult human beings with self agency.

 

What I am 100% confident about predicting is that Baldwin will turn this into an anti-gun crusade.  "See, even your botoxed gods aren't safe with murder-irons, so nobody should get to have murder irons.  Except actors, of course, because you can trust us now."

 

[Cannonfodder]

Just had this pop up on Google

https://www.vulture.com/amp/2021/10/abcs-the-rookie-bans-live-guns-on-set.html

[Rogerborg]

1 hour ago, Cannonfodder said:

Just had this pop up on Google

https://www.vulture.com/amp/2021/10/abcs-the-rookie-bans-live-guns-on-set.html

 

Long overdue, really.  Especially considering how much of Hollywood seems determined to not learn anything about the murder-irons that they hate so much.  It's fascinating to watch the very few exceptions on screen, like Adam Baldwin (no relation, 2nd Amendment advocate), or Tricia Helfer (farmgirl, once her strict trigger discipline has been seen, it cannot be unseen).

 

 

Urgh, the stuff that's coming out now.  Filming being halted on the armourer's previous film when she was waving guns around, loading them unsafely, then handing them to an 11 year old kid.

 

And the murder-iron in question being used by the crew to fuck around shooting live rounds, on-set out of hours.  Whoever brought those rounds on set should probably be getting the short drop and sudden stop, alongside the armourer.

[AirSniper]

I have seen youtube videos of players with machine guns that fire and you see the muzzle flash. Thats the sort of firearm that I refer to in the reenactment scene, which is where they belong and not on a game field.

[Shamal]

1 hour ago, AirSniper said:

I have seen youtube videos of players with machine guns that fire and you see the muzzle flash. Thats the sort of firearm that I refer to in the reenactment scene, which is where they belong and not on a game field.

I use my spitfire with muzzle flash on night games. It all adds to the realism. 

[Tommikka]

Something like spitfire tracers is fine - it’s just a light

 

Players using blank firers in a game are an absolute no. (Even if they are UK legal with sealed barrels etc)

 

I don’t like the slippery slope trope (ban this today and they will take everything)

But for airsoft skirmishing the ‘realism’ factor is the only reason why the skirmisher defence was added, establishing skirmishing as a level of ‘playing reenactment’

Stating that we don’t need any realism means there is no need for RIFs

 

 

Definitely no to flame flashes out of a barrel, yes if you want it with light up flashes, yes to appropriate recreational pyro and yes to suitably managed ‘display’ pyro

 

 

 

[AirSniper]

I have seen some US airsoft games where there are players with real machine guns firing blank training rounds...

 

What people don't realise is that a blank trainer has a wadding in it that is like a projectile, so you shoot someone with a training round at close quarters, you risk maiming the person.

You have this issue where the wad plug in a "Bang and Scare em" cartridge, usually home made, ejects at velocities that can seriously hurt or kill someone.

As things take off in the US, they catch on here.

I see no need for this level of realism, Airsoft has it all that is needed and in a safe format, unlike people wanting to bring formats that are potentially lethal to a game, sorry, not up for that. If you want more power or bigger bangs then get a shotgun licence and go clay shooting. 

[Rogerborg]

4 hours ago, AirSniper said:

What people don't realise is that a blank trainer has a wadding in it that is like a projectile

 

That's the thing, I'd be astonished if most airsofters don't know that.  I'd be pretty certain that site owners will, and the gun owners certainly will, so why they're allowing it boggles the mind.  I imagine it's: "My intention is to aim over their heads, it'll be fine because accidents never happen."

 

 

4 hours ago, AirSniper said:

As things take off in the US, they catch on here.

 

Fortunately we don't have a profusion of live firearms here from which to shoot blanks.  Even if someone does turn up with a blank firing gun, it should have a blocked barrel and the best they can do is to blow their own nose off through a top vent.

 

But I completely agree, keep that well away from airsoft fields.  I don't even like TAG rounds, as on a back of the envelope calculation of the claimed 32m/s and 30g I make that 15.36J, running pretty close to the 16J air gun limit.  They are certainly not airsoft guns by any stretch of the imagination (so need an air gun licence in Scotland), and are far beyond what EN166F eye protection is rated for.  I await "But, but, I only intend to lob them, and accidents only happen to other people."

[Samurai]

Don't worry. In the UK half the players would faint hearing the first blank shot and the next day youtube would be full of videos of "REAL STEEL GUN SHOT MADE MY EAR BLEED".