Select Page

Did Baldwin shoot himself in the foot?

Did Baldwin shoot himself in the foot?

Alec Baldwin sat down for a one-on-one interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos about the actor’s shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.  Unlike his testy impromptu roadside exchange with reporters, Baldwin came with his carefully crafted script – and Stephanopoulos followed his traditions of offering up softball questions in exchange for the interview.

He made a number of new revelations.  The most surprising was that – after all these weeks and all those other public statements – Baldwin said that he never pulled the trigger.  He whipped it out and the gun went off by itself.

Of course, if that were true, Baldwin would reduce his liability by adding a defective gun to his blaming of armorer, Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

The problem with Baldwin’s current version of events is that a gun firing off itself is extremely unlikely – close to impossible.  That is not my opinion.  CNN brought on a gun expert who showed all the possibilities of how a pistol like the one Baldwin had in his hand would fire a bullet.  They all required pulling the trigger.  The most extreme example was to pull the trigger first and then pull back and release the hammer.  The experts flatly stated that it is unlikely the gun went off on its own.  He had never seen that happen.

The closest thing that the expert said that would conform to Baldwin’s explanation is that he may not have realized that he pulled the trigger if he had inadvertently applied pressure.  A trigger will fire before it is pulled back completely. 

If you are inclined to believe Baldwin – and I am not – that still leaves the matter of pointing a gun at another person.  Even I know that, and I rarely handle a gun – a few trips to the range for target play or skeet shooting.

Baldwin claimed that he initially thought Hutchins had fainted or had a heart attack – and it was more than an hour later that he realized she had been shot.  Whoa!  She gets shot and the director gets wounded immediately behind her after the gun goes off, and Baldwin is clueless as to what happened? 

In the interview, Baldwin took on the role of prosecutor – blaming the armorer for the death of Hutchins.  He said that in all his experiences with guns on a set, it is the armorer, not the assistant director who gives the gun to the actor.  And then the armorer opens the gun to show that it is not loaded with real bullets.  Others are asked if they want to inspect the gun.  Baldwin even said that they may shake the bullets to hear the rattle of a blank. (I never heard that before.)

It is in that part of the interview where I think Baldwin shot himself in the foot.  In accusing the armorer and the staff of not adhering to movie-set gun-safety procedures, Baldwin revealed that he was well aware of what should have happened – step-by-step and in detail.  In that regard, Baldwin was exhibiting as much reckless disregard for the procedures as those he was accusing.

In talking about Hutchins, Baldwin appeared to break down into a sob – with his face in his hands.  I was trying to think of a time that I saw a person on camera put their face in the hands to sob – and I have seen many people on camera or at a lectern break-down, as the say.  I cannot think of a single instant where the used their hands to cover their face.  They try to maintain control – maybe wiping away tears.  Holding their breath for a moment.  In the most recent notable breakdown, Kyle Rittenhouse did not bury his face in his hands.  And even from my own experience of having one of those public breakdowns, I never buried my face in my hands.

But … on the other hand, I have seen many instances of folks burying their face in their hands in front of cameras.  In movies.  A movie industry friend of mine said that it is done because the director does not want the movie-goers to notice the lack of tears.  Beyond that, I will leave the issue up to you folks at home to decide whether Baldwin was emotionally overwhelmed or … acting.

Based on years of experience in consulting people dealing with crisis situations, the Baldwin performance appeared to me as a very carefully and strategically crafted script – designed to reduce his own potential legal liability – and to improve his public image yet again after a problematic even.

You may have forgotten his abusive phone call with his little daughter and a couple of public scuffles with reporters and photographers.  This seemed to be more of the same.

What?   Oh!  No, I am not a fan of Baldwin.  In fact, after he wanted to ban horse carriage rides in New York and other cities, I coined a name for those sacks – those horse diapers — that keep the streets clean — “Baldwin Bags.”  I received a communication from a livery group in the Big Apple saying that they actually took up the name.  You can check it out on the Urban Dictionary.

The question remains … should Baldwin face charges up to and including reckless homicide?  Certainly, involuntary manslaughter. 

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. VIETNAM VET 67-68


  2. Donny hauser

    If the revolver hammer was pulled back by not all the way then the gun could fire if the hammer was released. I know. I’ve been a gun nut all of my life. And I’m also very well trained in gun safety. And the deadly force laws. A gun is a delicate instrument and can be accidentally fired by several reasons. My question is why was he pointing the gun at Ms. Hutchens?

  3. Good Luck

    I do not believe anything Baldwin said in this interview . Guns do not go off by themselves , and You Never, NEVER point a gun at someone .

  4. james fishman

    wait, you’re using Rittenhouse as an example of legitimate emotion? seriously? that was the most staged, fake showing ever.

    • Larry kuhn

      Kyle is a great American

  5. frank stetson

    “In talking about Hutchins, Baldwin appeared to break down into a sob – with his face in his hands. I was trying to think of a time that I saw a person on camera put their face in the hands to sob – and I have seen many people on camera or at a lectern break-down, as the say.” Staged you say. Hey, Baldwin just went to the Crybaby Kyle School of Crime Arts.

    All nods to hypocrisy aside, Baldwin should just have done the interview IF we was planning to say “no responsibility,” that was never going to play well since, in the end, he WAS the man with the gun. And then, especially given his normal attitudes, it was all down hill from there.

    Of course it was staged, as was Kyle, who wouldn’t try to be prepared for these types of events. But it was not staged well probably due to Baldwin’s basic hubris where certainly was on full display.

    I didn’t pull the trigger? What’s next, I didn’t aim the gun, she stepped in front of it after it went off? Anyone holding a real gun knows don’t point it at anything you don’t want to shoot, even in play, even with an empty chamber. The man is guilty of a lack of common sense at minimum, perhaps putting him somewhere he can’t harm himself or others would be appropriate :<(

    Let's wait till the forensics et all, this crap is past getting old.

  6. Kurt Walker

    I’m a three time combat veteran and also a certified classroom and firing range instructor. Some out there may cut Baldwin some slack on this, but NOT HERE. I don’t care who or how many people handled that weapon before Baldwin held it THE FINAL RESPONSIBILITY WAS IN HIS HANDS, PERIOD.

  7. Joe

    Baldwin is a radical,liberal, ignorant, lying, pos, that must think were all a bunch of idiots, to believe anything this moron says.There are only two actions with that type of gun, u have to cock it,and the only way it can go off, is pulling the trigger. The trigger doesn’t pull itself, who ever is behind the trigger pulled it.That leaves airhead baldwin, to blame for the woman getting killed, he pointed a loaded gun at her, and obviously pulled the trigger,which I believe,would be involuntary manslaughter at the least. I bet his lawyer, is pulling his hair out,because this idiot is flapping his jaws, and just sunk his case, as an accident.