16

The Scumbag Actor Who Lies For A Living Claims 'The Gun Did It'

Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 4 months ago to Politics
33 comments | Share | Flag

Excerpt:
"As noted earlier, the problem is that Baldwin was not just an actor but a producer on the set. He was arguably responsible for the set itself and the props.

What is most striking about the new claim is that it is subject to physical testing and even a demonstrative exhibit before the jury. If experts report that the gun did not have a “hair trigger” or some defect, it would greatly erode Baldwin’s credibility. It is very unlikely that his counsel has had access to the gun or even any film evidence from the scene. Notably, however, they do have the statement of an assistant director that he thought the shooting was a “misfire.”

Moreover, I am surprised that Baldwin claims that he would never point even a prop gun at someone and pull the trigger. Given his many shooting scenes, that would be disprovable."
-----------------------------------------------------

Bottom Line: After the 2020 election theft and refusal to audit, did anyone expect a leftist scumbag to tell the truth?


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by 3 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    (1) Some things just can't be done as well in cgi ... yet.
    (My business partner is retired from electronics special effects, so I do have a decent source of info.)
    (2) Special effects has union reps to maintain status quo.
    (However in this case the employees were not unionized.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 3 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    he is just trying to escape liability. He should be found guilty at least on a civil basis for the result.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 3 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Baldwin trusted something or someone, and pulled the trigger anyway. HE should be responsible for what happened. The lesson is that if you are going to pull a trigger and point a gun at someone, you better check to make sure it isnt loaded. What are they doing firing guns at people in this day and age of CGI filming anyway.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 3 years, 4 months ago
    I quit even watching old movies with Baldwin since he went leftist. He is dead to me, as Mr wonderful says on shark tank. He fired the gun, he should be liable at least on a civil basis for what happened.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 3 years, 4 months ago
    He knows this kind of logic works in this dim-witted age. "I didn't pull the trigger" = "I have zero liability" Of course, that's not true. But it's like when we they found a reference to a communist organization in a state government document here recently and the explanation was, "It was a very lengthy document." Media says, "Ok! No more questions needed!" I find this line of commentary pretty funny, actually.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 years, 4 months ago
    Single Action.
    Baldwin could easily have fired it without ever touching the trigger, but it would NOT fire unless someone actuated the hammer to fall on the chamber holding the live round
    Baldwin is a lying sack of $#!7.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mhubb 3 years, 4 months ago
    it does not really matter how a "real" round of ammo got into the gun

    what matters is
    was the gun pointed at someone deliberately?
    if it was, there is no excuse for this

    was the trigger pulled and if so where was the gun pointed?

    if the trigger was not pulled at the time the shot was fired, was it pulled earlier and there was a hang-fire that was not reported to the Armorer or dealt with in a proper fashion?

    i have an 8 shot S&W 357
    hand loads, had a dud
    i did not clear it
    tried the next round, both went off
    will NEVER do that again...
    always clear a presumed dud
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Commander 3 years, 4 months ago
    Hmmm...."misfire". This is the condition under which the "load" magically "triggers" it's self. Somebody! Call Oxford! We need a new definition!
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo