SAFE Act Exemption for TV and Movies

dajowi · March 1, 2013, 10:19 AM

I just read this in Yahoo News...and it figures.

NEW YORK TO EXEMPT TV AND MOVIES UNDER STATE'S NEW GUN LAW.

**tyme** · March 1, 2013, 10:28 AM

Okay, I'll attempt to rescue this thread. (OP is a fairly straight-forward example of a drive-by thread, which cites some tidbit (often current events) primarily in order to enflame emotions without offering any content to discuss; drive-bys are generally discouraged, and the news is at least a day old.)

NY obviously values campaign contributions from the media more than they value the appearance of equity and propriety.

Furthermore, although it may not be the primary cause, if anyone thinks violence in media has no affect at all on the motivation or chosen methods of mass-murderers, I think that's naive... and if the anti-gunners think that "assault weapons" are so bad, perhaps they should consider whether filling the airwaves and fiber with images of such is good public policy.

dajowi · March 1, 2013, 11:12 AM

Well I've never been accused of a drive by anything

**Tom Servo** · March 1, 2013, 11:21 AM

The matter under discussion appears to be this article.

A drive-by post is defined in the forum rules here. All members would be well-served by reviewing those.

As it stands, staff had to figure out what the thread was about, and we had to change the title to something that reflects context.

rc · March 3, 2013, 12:51 AM

How will they be able to villify gun owners in their public campaign unless they can keep showing machines guns spraying a bazzilion bullets, say they only want to outlaw evil weapons like these and then go after common self defense guns... get the picture... I do.....

MCCALL911 · March 3, 2013, 01:41 AM

I'm no Hollywood insider, but I thought they were mostly using fake guns now, either gas operated or rubber guns where muzzle flash was added by CGI. One of the reasons was the headaches over security involving real guns. Some of them went missing.

Tickling · March 3, 2013, 01:56 AM

^From the article:

Quote:

He said movies and TV may use fake guns that wouldn't be subject to the new law but the industry wants "certainty." The revised law would allow them to use real weapons without real ammunition.

In other words, Hollywood wants to keep the option of using real weapons (w/ blanks) open if they so choose.

MCCALL911 · March 3, 2013, 08:39 AM

Quote:

In other words, Hollywood wants to keep the option of using real weapons (w/ blanks) open if they so choose.

OK, I overlooked that part.
I've heard in the past that when full-auto weapons like Tommy guns were used, the practice was to plug the barrel except for a small orifice where only the gases from the blanks could escape. I think they also used lighter recoil springs so that the weapons were basically demilled. (I'm thinking of the 1960's TV show Combat! specifically.)

NY Stagehand · March 3, 2013, 08:41 PM

I have followed the Firing Line for a long time as a loyal lurker. The service that Al Norris has provided in tracking 2A. cases is priceless. MaxB's latest work and this thread have given me reason to finally join and add to the conversation.

I am a professional Stagehand and work mostly in NYC. I do a fair amount of film work as well in particular as an Arms Master aka "Gun Guy." I want to point out that this requested exemption is coming from the film industry's "suits." The rank and file film people (behind the camera!) don't want the Safe Act OR any exemptions. I sure don't! I want it to hurt MY industry enough that they start fighting the WHOLE thing. There is already a problem with NYC granting "We Love You" carry permits to big names in the film industry. It is done exactly and only to curry political favor. The rest of the industry resents the two tier system as much as the rest of us.

Imagine, you are loading a SWAT teams worth of "guns" into a locked box and wheeling it down the block and around the corner to a rental van at 4 a.m. and two guys appear out of nowhere. They demand that you just leave the box and walk away or they will shoot you with their very real gun. They don't know they are props and require a lot of milling or parts replacement to be functional but they are willing to mess you up for the perceived gain. I know a few guys who faced just this scenario. Even under the standards of "demonstrated need" in NYC, you can't get a permit or extend your upstate permit to NYC. Oh and just for fun, You can't wear ballistic armor AND carry a handgun as a citizen here...

Informationally, cast plastic guns are the standard for extras. Some shots require what are called "hero props" that are most often modified REAL weapons. Some are blank firing, others are full function actions that will not fire (think shortened pins and blocked channels) Some of these weapons are much more expensive than the original base model before modification. They are rendered "idiot proof" ( make your own jokes about my on screen co-workers! Some of them are on OUR side!) so that nobody can be hurt even by being "The Crow" stupid!!!

Airsofts are okay for low budget films but most of the usable ones are approaching the cost of real guns (and they are illegal in NYC... just like a 17 oz. soda in a cafe...

If any body has any questions on the "Hollywood" end of guns I'll try to help.

Al Norris · March 3, 2013, 08:50 PM

Welcome to TFL, Stagehand. Your expertise is appreciated.

Now if only a few more ticked-off professionals would get involved..... mumble, grumble, mumble...

NY Stagehand · March 6, 2013, 06:22 PM

Thank you for the welcome!

Quote:

Now if only a few more ticked-off professionals would get involved..... mumble, grumble, mumble...

I'm working on it. I spend a lot of time in Socratic development. I put facts in front of people and let them stew. They do come around.

**Spats McGee** · March 6, 2013, 07:58 PM

NY Stagehand, if you're out there trying to gather support, you might take a look at A Repository of Reliable Sources & Citations for source material.

Welcome!

March 1, 2013, 10:19 AM	#1
dajowi Senior Member Join Date: November 2, 2005 Posts: 1,196	SAFE Act Exemption for TV and Movies I just read this in Yahoo News...and it figures. NEW YORK TO EXEMPT TV AND MOVIES UNDER STATE'S NEW GUN LAW.

March 1, 2013, 10:28 AM	#2
tyme Staff Join Date: October 13, 2001 Posts: 3,355	Okay, I'll attempt to rescue this thread. (OP is a fairly straight-forward example of a drive-by thread, which cites some tidbit (often current events) primarily in order to enflame emotions without offering any content to discuss; drive-bys are generally discouraged, and the news is at least a day old.) NY obviously values campaign contributions from the media more than they value the appearance of equity and propriety. Furthermore, although it may not be the primary cause, if anyone thinks violence in media has no affect at all on the motivation or chosen methods of mass-murderers, I think that's naive... and if the anti-gunners think that "assault weapons" are so bad, perhaps they should consider whether filling the airwaves and fiber with images of such is good public policy. __________________ “The egg hatched...” “...the egg hatched... and a hundred baby spiders came out...” (blade runner) “Who are you?” “A friend. I'm here to prevent you from making a mistake.” “You have no idea what I'm doing here, friend.” “In specific terms, no, but I swore an oath to protect the world...” (continuum) “It's a goal you won't understand until later. Your job is to make sure he doesn't achieve the goal.” (bsg)

March 1, 2013, 11:21 AM	#4
Tom Servo Staff Join Date: September 27, 2008 Location: Foothills of the Appalachians Posts: 13,059	The matter under discussion appears to be this article. A drive-by post is defined in the forum rules here. All members would be well-served by reviewing those. As it stands, staff had to figure out what the thread was about, and we had to change the title to something that reflects context. __________________ Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe

March 3, 2013, 01:41 AM	#6
MCCALL911 Senior Member Join Date: January 26, 2005 Location: Alabama Posts: 196	I'm no Hollywood insider, but I thought they were mostly using fake guns now, either gas operated or rubber guns where muzzle flash was added by CGI. One of the reasons was the headaches over security involving real guns. Some of them went missing. __________________ --------------------------------------------------- Moe Howard: "Fire at will!" Larry Fine: "Which one's Will?"

March 6, 2013, 07:58 PM	#12
Spats McGee Staff Join Date: July 28, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 8,821	NY Stagehand, if you're out there trying to gather support, you might take a look at A Repository of Reliable Sources & Citations for source material. Welcome! __________________ I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.

March 1, 2013, 11:12 AM	#3
dajowi Senior Member Join Date: November 2, 2005 Posts: 1,196	Well I've never been accused of a drive by anything

March 3, 2013, 12:51 AM	#5
rc Senior Member Join Date: April 28, 2001 Location: CA Posts: 1,767	How will they be able to villify gun owners in their public campaign unless they can keep showing machines guns spraying a bazzilion bullets, say they only want to outlaw evil weapons like these and then go after common self defense guns... get the picture... I do.....

March 3, 2013, 08:41 PM	#9
NY Stagehand Junior Member Join Date: March 3, 2013 Posts: 6	I have followed the Firing Line for a long time as a loyal lurker. The service that Al Norris has provided in tracking 2A. cases is priceless. MaxB's latest work and this thread have given me reason to finally join and add to the conversation. I am a professional Stagehand and work mostly in NYC. I do a fair amount of film work as well in particular as an Arms Master aka "Gun Guy." I want to point out that this requested exemption is coming from the film industry's "suits." The rank and file film people (behind the camera!) don't want the Safe Act OR any exemptions. I sure don't! I want it to hurt MY industry enough that they start fighting the WHOLE thing. There is already a problem with NYC granting "We Love You" carry permits to big names in the film industry. It is done exactly and only to curry political favor. The rest of the industry resents the two tier system as much as the rest of us. Imagine, you are loading a SWAT teams worth of "guns" into a locked box and wheeling it down the block and around the corner to a rental van at 4 a.m. and two guys appear out of nowhere. They demand that you just leave the box and walk away or they will shoot you with their very real gun. They don't know they are props and require a lot of milling or parts replacement to be functional but they are willing to mess you up for the perceived gain. I know a few guys who faced just this scenario. Even under the standards of "demonstrated need" in NYC, you can't get a permit or extend your upstate permit to NYC. Oh and just for fun, You can't wear ballistic armor AND carry a handgun as a citizen here... Informationally, cast plastic guns are the standard for extras. Some shots require what are called "hero props" that are most often modified REAL weapons. Some are blank firing, others are full function actions that will not fire (think shortened pins and blocked channels) Some of these weapons are much more expensive than the original base model before modification. They are rendered "idiot proof" ( make your own jokes about my on screen co-workers! Some of them are on OUR side!) so that nobody can be hurt even by being "The Crow" stupid!!! Airsofts are okay for low budget films but most of the usable ones are approaching the cost of real guns (and they are illegal in NYC... just like a 17 oz. soda in a cafe... If any body has any questions on the "Hollywood" end of guns I'll try to help.

March 3, 2013, 08:50 PM	#10
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	Welcome to TFL, Stagehand. Your expertise is appreciated. Now if only a few more ticked-off professionals would get involved..... mumble, grumble, mumble...