Watching Judge Schroeder and the Lawyers Argue About the Jury Instructions...

They are arguing about whether first degree reckless endangerment or second degree reckless endangerment is appropriate.   For reasons that I do not understand, the defense attorney seemed to be arguing for the first degree charge and prosecutor arguing for second degree.  I think the defense is trying to put a charge not plausible to the jury.  Did he engage in actions that showed a reckless disregard for human life?  Firing a gun in an area where others were present seems to be the basis for the reckless disregard for human life.  Even if in self-defense is not sufficient?