I read the linked article. No where does it say that the guy pointed a gun at them.
And even if that is the case, the guy had his back to them and was running away when they shot him, essentially they shot him in the back when he wasn't a threat to them. If he had been facing them and pointing a gun, sure, but not when he was running away with his back towards them. He was absolutely no threat to them at that point.
Also, according to that article, Bush felt the trial was fair and the verdict just. So I don't understand why he would lessen their sentence if he felt it was fair and just to begin with.
|The action by the president, who believes the border agents received fair trials and that the verdicts were just, does not diminish the seriousness of their crimes, the official said.
The guards themselves knew what they did was wrong because they even tried to cover up the shooting by picking up the shell casings. They intentionally shot at the guy and hit him in the butt when he was no longer a threat to them. That's a bad shooting and they knew it.