 Section 1 ( 2 ) of the Act creates an offence which includes all the elements of the section 1 ( 1 ) offence with an additional element of intending or being reckless as to the endangering of life . The offence lies in possible effects of the defendant 's actions and it is not therefore necessary to prove an actual danger to life . However , there must be a connection between the damage and the mental state of the defendant . In R v. Steer ( 1986 ) , the defendant fired a gun intending to injure another person , but missed and hit a window instead ; it was held that although the intention to endanger life and the fact of damage coexisted , the damage itself did not endanger life . This approach was extended in R v. Webster ( 1995 ) , in which the relationship between the damage caused and the damage intended was explored . That case involved the throwing of heavy items into the paths of moving vehicles , and it was held that a defendant may be guilty if he intends to endanger life by the actual damage intended , or is reckless that life will be endangered by that damage . Therefore , although a defendant does not necessarily intend to endanger life when he intends to break a car window , ignoring the likely risk that this will cause the driver to swerve into the path of another vehicle , perhaps fatally , constitutes recklessness and is a sufficient causative nexus . 
