Liberals lie. It's what they do. And they blame anyone but themselves.

What's really going to bake his bagels is explaining how the hammer got pulled back.

That gun is a "Single Action Army" Colt 45. That means, unless the hammer is physically pulled back - the gun cannot fire.

There's no way to fire a single action revolver unless the hammer is pulled back. How is he going to explain how the hammer was pulled back?

And even if it was the type that pulling the trigger causes the hammer to move it still doesn't matter. Alec ignored all safety rules and common sense including the rules of the actor's union he belongs to which has the same strict gun rules as a NRA safety course.

What you're describing is "double action"

Here's how the naming convention works.

Single Action = pulling the trigger does one and only one thing, it releases a cocked hammer.
Double Action = pulling the trigger will release a cocked hammer, or if the hammer is NOT cocked, it cocks the hammer and then releases it.

It's just funny that the lack of firearms knowledge is painting him into an even smaller corner than he was already in. He would have been better off to admit ignorance of gun safety.

I'm a gun guy...and that particular gun is on my bucket list of guns.....it's completely impractical - but historically significant.

And some of those old pistols had a safety feature and others didn't.

Wisecracker is on a timer.. I'm just relaying his comment

The Colt Single Action Army has no external safety. A later version, called the Colt Cowboy had a safety - but that is not the gun used by this movie. The SAA had a "safety notch" in the hammer, which provided some measure of protection from accidentally bumping the hammer when "half cocked", but nothing like that would allow the gun to fire when the trigger was pulled. It becomes impossible for a bump to cause a misfire, because the safety notch at half-cock position misaligns the hammer, preventing it from striking the primer. You'd have to do a lot more than bump it to set it off, you'd have to beat the hammer on the ground to break out of the safety notch - and then you'd have to hit it at just the right angle to re-align it with the primer.

Unless Baldwin was beating on the back of the gun with a blunt object and incredible luck - there's absolutely no way for it to have gone off without having pulled the hammer all the way back. There would be plenty of evidence of blunt force being applied to the hammer if that was the case.
Once that hammer is all the way back, the safety notch has already been bypassed.

The only way to win with that argument in court is if his lawyer is a hypnotist. Any competent gun expert will be able to show that the workings of the gun contradict the story he's telling.

He's out there talking to his target (no pun intended) audience which is other liberals and they don't know anything about guns or how to think critically, so they'll scoop it right up.

Rittenhouse - Tried to turn himself the first chance he got. Considered a 'villain'.
Baldwin - Makes excuses to escape responsibility. Considered a 'hero'.