If I was trying to stop a car-full of convicts/perps heading away from me, then I would aim the rifle - after first resting my front gun-holding arm's elbow on the bus itself to steady the barrel & scope - at the DRIVER, not the passenger.
Just saying.
[deleted]
I think it's obvious the guard aimed at the driver but could not shoot properly because of his wounds and bad condition. The car had gone a run already and it was far from the guard.
shareThat's exactly what I would have thought occurred.
shareProbably that would be true. I tuned in on the movie in progress, and missed that part.
The really bad news is that if the guard accidentally missed the car and killed a totally innocent bystander down the road, and the guard recovered, (only the bystander died), the gun-crime laws would charge ALL the robbers with murder plus assault/attempted murder for the guard, and anyone that helped them as accomplices to murder, even though the guard killed the bystander. (The same would be true if one of the robbers was killed by the guard.) Those laws were part of politician's "tough on crime" campaigns and legislation, and seem to give immunity to guards that just blast away...
Right, or too harsh?
A recent example of a similar harsh penalty was an elderly woman who was being threatened, and fired her pistol deliberately into the ground/dirt as a warning shot that was meant to, and succeeded in chasing the threat away, with no one getting hurt. SHE was arrested and convicted of a gun crime, and sentenced to 50 years in prison, which was a life sentence for all practical purposes, even though she was protecting herself. The reports had the jury unaware that finding her guilty of firing a shot carried a mandatory sentence...