MovieChat Forums > Kansas City Confidential (1952) Discussion > So how come John Payne's still a suspect...

So how come John Payne's still a suspect when...

posted 14 years ago by corriganville
13 replies | jump to latest

his delivery van has no bullet holes in it? The bank guard fired 3 or 4 shots at the fleeing van. Hopefully he hit the van and not some bystander down the street.

[–] chrisasiama 14 years ago

I just saw this movie last night. I really enjoyed it but the police were stupid. They should of noticed the rather obvious clue you pointed out. They were also too quick to pin the rap on Payne without any concrete proof.

[–] mathew5000 13 years ago

Right, the movie was trying to show that the cops are stupid, that they break the law and can't be trusted, that they typically obtain confessions by torture.

[–] megas22 13 years ago

During that time period police were leaning more toward how the movie portrayed them. Police want to clear there cases quickly, especially high profile ones. Plus, Payne had a criminal history and would be easy to pin it on him. Police reform took place around the 70's.

[–] Jason_Radley 13 years ago

The obvious answer is that the guard didn't hit the van. Most people who carry a gun aren't very proficient with it.

[–] heyuactor 13 years ago

It was wrong to have the guard shoot like that. It's only money, they weren't shooting at him, and there were pedestrians around. But hey, it's a B movie.

"Did you make coffee...? Make it!"--Cheyenne.

[–] jhvaughan2 13 years ago

Hey. Its a movie. That was what they called "action". Firearms usage in movies and television has nothing to do with real life. Just check out modern cop shows where they shoot (at) someone every week, and never go on administrative leave.

[–] bothpartiessuck 13 years ago

I disagree with your last statement. I have plenty of former LE and military friends who carry and are excellent shots.

Most SECURITY GUARDS aren't proficient with a gun; that I will agree with.

[–] tintinetmilou 12 years ago

Although you know plenty of people who are excellent shots, this in no way dispproves the original statement "Most people who carry a gun aren't very proficient with it" does it?

And how many is "plenty" anyway? 10, 50?

[–] liscarkat (19418) 4 years ago

I've spent a lot of time firing revolvers. Just about anyone could hit the back of a Chevy van without even being a skilled marksman.

[–] ktowny 12 years ago

No one can hit the target when they do that 'flick shot' thing, y'know, flick their wrist as the shoot instead of holding their arm steady as they shoot. I've always wondered why people shot that way in the old days.

Love's turned to lust and blood's turned to dust in my heart.

[–] franzkabuki 12 years ago

"I´ve always wondered why people shot that way in the old days".

I´m sure they only did so in the movies. But, yeah, it does look kinda ridiculous.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] liscarkat (19418) 4 years ago

If you sling or thrust the gun forward, it adds about ten feet per second to the bullet's velocity. Today they do the sideways gun, which is much more deadly than regular upright gun.

[–] alisotom 9 years ago

that security guard couldn't hit the wall of a barn, even if he was standing inside it.