This argument is a distraction. Unless the prosecutor is doing some kind of fakeop to appease the public, there's more the story, and possibly evidence we haven't been talking about. For example Tim Pool just had a headline that Baldwin had live ammo in his belt for some reason. Also he was the producer so therefore indirectly in charge of everything including gun safety himself. Also they had kicked the armorer off the set earlier. Things that start to point to his responsibility.

The expectation is that when you are handed something purporting to be a firearm, you clear it. Regardless of whether you're paying someone to manage it.

What does "clear it" mean and why would an actor know that? That's exactly why someone is hired to handle gun safety. Actors shouldn't have to know anything about gun safety. It might as well be a toy to them. Unless they know otherwise, or the armorer gives them the proper handling instructions first.

But that doesn't mean Baldwin isn't at fault.

Unless they are told it's not a real gun. Actors shouldn't have to know anything about gun safety. It might as well be a toy to them. For props that are real, "safed" firearms, someone is hired to handle gun safety.

But this argument is a distraction. Unless the prosecutor is doing some kind of fakeop to appease the public, there must be more the story, some evidence we haven't been talking about. For example Tim Pool just had a headline that Baldwin had live ammo in his belt for some reason. Also he was the producer so therefore indirectly in charge of everything including gun safety himself. Also they had kicked the armorer off the set earlier. Things that start to point to his responsibility.