Baldwin's title as an "actor" is irrelevant. He is a professional whose job involves handling a firearm. His ability to distinguish between a live round and a blank is no different than that of a cop. That said, a person properly trained and capable can easily tell the difference between a blank and a live round. If Baldwin couldn't tell the difference, he shouldn't have been permitted to touch the guns.
Swinging the cylinder open would reveal whether there was ANYthing in the gun. There should be nothing at all in the cylinder.
Interesting. I had to look up where Taos is - New Mexico.
If you're living in the city, I'd say you need a small firearm in your purse to protect yourself in the city way more than someone rural needs to protect themselves from wild animals. And if you came here and somehow was able to know, you would probably be shocked to know how many people around you in public have a firearm on them. Almost everyone I know carries a firearm on them or in their vehicle at least.
If people are going to ignore a law that you can't just shoot someone, why do people think those folks will follow different laws?
I disagree. He could have opened the cylinder and then pulled a round out to observe what type of round was in the gun. I agree that in some guns, the bullet is initially concealed, but the gun operator has the responsibility to do whatever is necessary to actually observe the condition of the gun, especially if it's their intent to point it at somebody and pull the trigger.
Baldwin's lawyers likely hard at work to create their version of this women as well as a version of the assistant director. New Mexico is trying to attract additional film making business so economic interests also in play. By standards that would apply to you or I the trigger puller would be charged and I hope that a uniform standard of justice is applied in this case. In theory (at least) we are still a country of laws and not men.
