> DHS training manual says not to stand in front of a vehicle
Supposing that you could cite this, it is irrelevant, because he was not "standing" there but completing a circle of the vehicle to gather video footage.
> But also, depending on the angle of entry, you could be quite far to the side and still shoot through the front.
There are photos of the bullet hole in the windshield and it's quite clear that the impact was quite square.
> Or if the direction of entry is the most important to you, most of the bullets went through the side window, what position does that indicate?
It indicates the result of the car moving during the fraction of a second required to fire multiple shots (faster than a human can consciously process the decision to stop firing, and congruent with standard LEO training to fire multiple shots).
> Or maybe none of this is important in the case of propaganda, like I implied.
This is not an argument and is also not appropriate rhetoric for HN.
> There are photos of the bullet hole in the windshield and it's quite clear that the impact was quite square.
And there is also video from multiple angles with enough detail to determine that the gun was fired while the officer was still in front of the vehicle.
Supposing that you could cite this, it is irrelevant, because he was not "standing" there but completing a circle of the vehicle to gather video footage.
> But also, depending on the angle of entry, you could be quite far to the side and still shoot through the front.
There are photos of the bullet hole in the windshield and it's quite clear that the impact was quite square.
> Or if the direction of entry is the most important to you, most of the bullets went through the side window, what position does that indicate?
It indicates the result of the car moving during the fraction of a second required to fire multiple shots (faster than a human can consciously process the decision to stop firing, and congruent with standard LEO training to fire multiple shots).
> Or maybe none of this is important in the case of propaganda, like I implied.
This is not an argument and is also not appropriate rhetoric for HN.