Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
“Actor Alec Baldwin and a weapons specialist will be charged with involuntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting of a cinematographer on a New Mexico movie set, prosecutors announced [last] Thursday, citing a ‘criminal disregard for safety.’… Halyna Hutchins died shortly after being wounded during rehearsals at a ranch on the outskirts of Santa Fe on Oct. 21, 2021. Baldwin was pointing a pistol at Hutchins when the gun went off, killing her and wounding the director, Joel Souza.” AP News
Here’s our prior coverage of the shooting. The Flip Side
The right supports the charges, arguing that Baldwin behaved irresponsibly.
“It is hard to see how Baldwin couldn’t have been charged with at least involuntary manslaughter. The first rule of gun safety is you don’t point a gun [at] something unless you intend to shoot it. Even if you believe the gun is unloaded, you don’t point it directly at others…
“Baldwin didn’t follow basic gun safety when he shot his cinematographer, Hutchins. Anyone who has been to a shooting range would have that drilled into them. And Baldwin, an actor for 40 years, who has been in many movies using guns, must surely have had this explained to him many times.”
John R. Lott Jr., The Federalist
“Baldwin, the actor, has maintained that despite his dereliction of duty in checking the chamber of the gun for bullets, he didn't actually pull the trigger of the gun when he aimed it directly at Hutchins. After investigating the shooting, the FBI determined that this claim was false…
“But [Baldwin], the producer, could not possibly escape justice via semantics and cock-and-bull stories. Shooting a woman to death — with a gun that had not been checked for bullets on a set where producers tolerated ‘plinking,’ or playing target practice with live rounds — may have been unintentional, but it was no mere accident. At issue here are not ill intentions but Baldwin's hubris and carelessness about others' lives.”
Tiana Lowe, Washington Examiner
“Baldwin has blamed the armorer, other producers, literally anyone he could think of other than himself. He told George Stephanopoulos that he was loving the process of making the film, of which he was not only the star but the producer, ‘and then this gun goes off,’ ruining everything. But guns don’t go off by themselves…
“As producer, Baldwin was responsible for the labor issues on set and the late payments that caused disgruntled crew members to walk off the ‘Rust’ set the day Hutchins was killed. He has barely addressed that in any of the interviews he’s given on the subject…
“Baldwin holds the final responsibility for Hutchins’ death. In his role as producer he should have ensured that industry safety standards were being followed; he should have made sure that the people he hired to do their jobs were capable of doing them.”
Libby Emmons, New York Post
The left is skeptical of the charges, arguing that actors are not responsible for the guns they handle on set.
The left is skeptical of the charges, arguing that actors are not responsible for the guns they handle on set.
“Yes, usually it is the responsibility of the person holding that gun to not point it at anyone unless they intend to shoot; it is usually the responsibility of the person holding the gun to know for sure whether or not it’s loaded by checking the carriage before they do anything else. But this was a movie set, where responsibilities are delegated and actors have every reason to believe that the guns they are being handed are props – or at least unloaded, or loaded with blanks…
“I would guess that a great many actors have never held, owned or fired a gun outside of a movie set. Just like many actors have never, outside of a movie set, scaled a building, performed surgery, won a sword fight, given birth or walked flawlessly in stilettos. It’s acting in the movies – by definition, a space of fantasy and falsity and faking it. Which is why there’s a team of pros nearby to make the faking look real.”
Jill Filipovic, CNN
“In announcing the indictment of Baldwin, the district attorney of Santa Fe County had this to say: ‘He has an absolute duty to know that what is in the gun that is being placed in his hand is safe.’ Well, maybe. But if there’s an absolute duty, what is its source?… Over the years, several actors have shot someone with a gun thought to be safe. Yet I’ve found not a single instance in which the actor was charged…
“What about Baldwin the producer? The Rust crew, including the props team, has complained of difficult working conditions and long hours that might well have contributed to an unsafe environment. If true, that's serious wrongdoing. Still, in cases I’m aware of, the liability of the production company has been adjudicated in civil, not criminal, court. Here, Baldwin has settled a wrongful death action filed by the cinematographer’s husband.”
Stephen L. Carter, Bloomberg
“Whatever the legal outcome… this was a tragedy that should never happen again… Why can’t Hollywood screen wizards create the effects of firearms without having to use even prop guns with dummy rounds? If they can make an actress look like ‘M3GAN,’ an AI doll that’s terrifying moviegoers in droves, why can’t they simulate a firearm discharge — and the recoil that the shooter experiences — without having a real weapon on set?”
Editorial Board, Los Angeles Times
A libertarian's take
“[Baldwin is] guilty of some pretty unsavory things. As chronicled in 2021 by S.E. Cupp in the New York Daily News, the actor has had a series of high-profile incidents that call into question his, er, judgment, which include using slurs against gay people and assaulting a man over a parking spot. But having a loathsome past doesn't render someone guilty of manslaughter. Even the most distasteful defendants deserve the same level of fairness—to have their charges evaluated based solely on the facts at hand…
“It reminded me of the case against Kyle Rittenhouse, who was prosecuted for shooting three men and killing two during the 2020 riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin. If you watched his trial in full, it was abundantly clear that he acted in self-defense, despite being an objectionable character to many people. But Rittenhouse was a symbol, his prosecution almost a foregone conclusion demanded by the political moment. And juries aren't supposed to deliver convictions based on how popular a defendant is.”
Billy Binion, Reason
