.
No it doesn't - because CRIMINAL negligence, as opposed to simple negligence, is recklessness with a wilful disregard for safety - i.e., doing something knowing that one is putting another person at significant risk.
Pointing a REAL gun at somebody and pulling the trigger is not in your mind a significant risk?
Your argument that if the gun is not loaded, then that is not a significant risk. But first you would need to be certain is what not loaded, right? Something Baldwin did not do.
Civil negligence means a person failed to exercise reasonable care in their actions. Criminal negligence, on the other hand, typically involves a negligent act that is so egregious, it's likely to result in the risk of death or serious bodily harm.
Again you are failing to comprehend the levels of culpability in criminal offenses. At the top of the culpability ladder in criminal offenses is intent. At the bottom is negligence. Negligence is not necessarily defined as "egregious", it may simply be defined as a failure to provide duty or care. I think you need to look this up for yourself. I keep explaining it to you, but you keep inserting your subjective interpretation, which is not how laws are written.
Why would Baldwin think that someone handing him a gun as a prop in a scene was "likely to result in the risk of death or serious bodily harm."
Because it was a REAL gun, he knew it was a REAL gun, and REAL guns are ALWAYS dangerous.
This kind of thing has hardly ever happened before.
That doesn't matter, but it has happened. Once is too many.
I am aware of one incident in 1984 where an actor died as a result of playing Russian Roullette with a gun that had a blank loaded into it,
Really stupid thing to do. Not just to point a real gun at your own head, loaded or not. But to ignore the fact that a blank is still an explosion of hot powder, gasses, and force. Nobody would explode a firecracker next to their own skull, why would they fire a blank next to their own skull? Darwin award much?
and then The Crow where Brandon Lee was shot because a bullet was accidentally left in the gun
To be more specific, the Brandon Lee incident was the result of a 'squib load' situation. So, different than the Baldwin incident.
See wikipedia explanation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Lee#cite_note-104
. On the other hand, there have been a total of 37 deaths in Hollywood and Television accidents in like the last 100+ years, and 24 of them were from helicopter accidents. That would seem to make, based on your logic, the use of helicopters on a movie set that causes death to be involuntary manslaughter by definition.
In the Vic Morrow death (Twilight Zone filming) where a helicopter crash killed Morrow and two child actors. The director and several others on that production were charged with involuntary manslaughter. They were acquitted by a jury of their peers, so maybe that may happen with Baldwin as well. Some sappy jurors may disregard obvious criminal negligence as what happened in the Twilight Zone film, and then Baldwin will get a pass.
I'm fine with charging Baldwin with a crime. And that being said, he is considered innocent until proven guilty. Never know what a jury may do, and does Baldwin really want to risk that? If he could accept a plea deal? In the Twilight Zone trial no deal was offered.