> possibly not as known to be potentially directly harmful as much as shooting a gun at someone. Shooting a gun at someone could lead to one person dead. Shoo

> possibly not as known to be potentially directly harmful as much as shooting a gun at someone. Shooting a gun at someone could lead to one person dead. Shooting a laser at a plane could lead to hundreds dead. If this is a metric, then 6 months is a great deal for the shooter, correct? >I am not sure it's cut-and-dry that a sentence like this is net better outcome It's probably impossible to measure that, since the factors are subjective. But it is in line with many punishments for similar action, as I mentioned. Also 6 months sentenced means much less served in most cases, the same way a 10 year sentence may get out in 5.