[user104658]

I agree on principle that custodial sentences should be for violent crime or people who have been criminal in a way that presents a clear ongoing danger to the public... However I also don't think he's innocent just because it was unintentional. I'd prefer the consequences (for crime in general) to be more creative than "stick em in jail" though.

Baldwin for example, prison or no prison, IMO should not be allowed around firearms ever again. Including on movie/TV sets. If the job requires an environment where there are live guns - tough, he can't do it. Full stop.

That said beyond that I'd advocate live firearms not being on ANY TV or film set in the first place. Prop guns and effects only. The risk is not worth it just to make it "slightly more authentic" - realistically, no one actually notices if it was a real gunshot, so there's no reason for a real gun.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

I agree on principle that custodial sentences should be for violent crime or people who have been criminal in a way that presents a clear ongoing danger to the public... However I also don't think he's innocent just because it was unintentional. I'd prefer the consequences (for crime in general) to be more creative than "stick em in jail" though.

Baldwin for example, prison or no prison, IMO should not be allowed around firearms ever again. Including on movie/TV sets. If the job requires an environment where there are live guns - tough, he can't do it. Full stop.

That said beyond that I'd advocate live firearms not being on ANY TV or film set in the first place. Prop guns and effects only. The risk is not worth it just to make it "slightly more authentic" - realistically, no one actually notices if it was a real gunshot, so there's no reason for a real gun.

I do agree with a lot of your points here tbh, especially the part about live firearms not really needed to create an immersive Western.