Alec Baldwin Indicted on Manslaughter Charge in ‘Rust’ Shooting

Finally - accidential or not, a human is dead. -- https://currently.att.yahoo.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-indicted-manslaughter-charge-192219507.html?source=EnEdit0000000000L&wtExtndSource=currently_breaking_1-19-24

"A human is dead" doesn't in and of itself constitute a crime. "Accidental or not" is actually the primary criterion for whether a crime has been committed. So it's the opposite of how Davey Dog puts it.

Involuntary manslaughter is to cause the death of another person through carelessness or negligence. Baldwin had been told that the gun he was handling wasn't loaded and that there was no live ammunition at all on the set. So the negligent person, the one who is culpable, is the one who prepared the gun--it whould have been checked. Notably, a similar case against Baldwin was dismissed last year.

But why is Davey Dog all full of glee about this latest indictment? Because for years, he's been bubbling over in impotent rage against Baldwin for his hilarious parody portrayals on Saturday Night Live of David's orange god. David has soiled dozens of pairs of panties watching them.

 You can always count on a looney liberal to make excuses for instances such as the killing of this woman - until such an act happens to someone they knew or to a loved one. Always...

Anyone who is gleeful about a terrible thing happening to somebody should pray they are never similarly involved/accused.  I am truly sorry for all involved in that situation.  Celebrities and other high profile people are targets for any case that can be made against them. 

Candy

It was an accident. No "excuses" need to be made.

it does say something about how guns are dangerous.

         Accident or not, someone died at the hand of another.    A gun is nothing but a tool, the "danger" is in it's usage. 

Well, David's very gleeful--but for him, it's about getting revenge on Alec Baldwin.

If you look at the case, a pretty shaky chain of "logic" has to be cobbled together to make Baldwin liable. That's no doubt why the case was thrown out before. (I guess double jeopardy doesn't apply here?)

I wonder why the idiot who put live ammo in the gun and handed it to Baldwin hasn't been charged.

   Other than the fact that Baldwin was the one who pulled the trigger, I have no problem with him. It makes no difference who did it, she died because she was shot. The person who loaded the gun is culpable, but not for pulling the trigger. This issue will be played out in court, and no matter the outcome two things are undisputable - no one will be happy about the outcome of the trial - and - the woman is dead.

Obviously, the woman who was shot is dead. That's not the issue. The issue is how culpable Baldwin was. Should he have checked the gun to see if it was loaded? Probably. Would he have known just from looking at it that it was loaded with live ammo rather than blanks? Probably not. Had he any reason to think the gun might be loaded with live ammo? No, he was specifically told that there was no live ammo on the set at all.

You would think there would be such a thing as a prop gun that can't be fired under any circumstances. I would hold the people responsible for props partially culpable here. As for pulling the trigger--it's pretty hard to convincingly act like you're drawing a gun and firing it without pulling the trigger.

I think a fair assessment is that several people are liable for this horrible accident, and charging Baldwin solely is a miscarriage of justice. He's not even the person most at blame here. But he's the most high-profile.