guideline section three c one point two at sentencing this record stated that the enhancement applied based on a very general and undeveloped record in fact a court fits reasoning into three very brief sentence stating and the unity school always near a school yes or however we don't know there are very important geographical and temporal aspects that are missing from this record what the record doesn't show is as important voluntarily opted to surrender he didn't continue running i also want to note that the record doesn't explain it states that he ran a high speed but it doesn't say relative to what we also don't know for how long and over what distance i also want to know that we don't know as i stated earlier the distance from where the cheese took place relative to the school and if we look at the key slaw discussing i find sections three c one point two we see that specificity in this finding matters if we go through it or numbness there was evidence presented at sentencing by one of the police officers who chased the defendant and he stated that the streets were lined with houses on both side of the road that the defendant traveled at speeds of approximately forty five to fifty miles per hour in the early afternoon hours the officer who testified in that sentencing also stated that the so whether it was an urban area the record shows that the judge the sentencing judge did not take that into account he took into account that there was a college nearby but again this we have a record come presumably because you hoped it wouldn't be found by the police right yes so the act of putting it there was meant to be so that they wouldn't find it which means it would be there the next morning he was hoping agreed with defense counsel affirmatively that these mr vegas actions just didn't rise the level of risk there are no more questions the cases have treated this type of of issue is as a factual finding and they have reviewed it for clear air and for example the case that the defense relied upon heavily in their case in their brief which is  she stated that she made can see that her client acted recklessly and he created a risk but she argued that the risk was allegedly not substantial we submit your hours and that is a waiver with respect to the first which ordinarily classifies as a reckless as reckless conduct and it is where there is a an involuntary manslaughter that is that results from driving of vehicle while under the so we can compare incorrect or not is this court noted that there was a grief chase not conducted at stupendously high speeds on small back roads in a heavily populated area during the early evening during which the defendant  intersections and at one point let police off the pursuing police officers up a hill where the police officers could not see what was on the other side this court found that based on those facts there was reckless conduct and that the risk and i quote that the risk of serious injury or death could hardly have been more obvious and that's got a bearing on this in the instinct we have that the defendant disobeyed police officers during a traffic stop he fled while driving at a high rate of speed and this is in the end when agreement actually is both in the plea agreement and in the peace or eventually crashed into another vehicle and this was in road one hundred seventy struck in a way that it may cause of a risk but that's not the only factory on there is more he fled north running with a loaded machine gun in his hand to this street looking at right next to a metropolitan t metropolitan campus of the intermarriage in university of puerto rico so clearly and in in response to your honor just as well as question this was an urban area and the district judge knows it he he lives in puerto subjective believes of the prosecution at the time that it entered into the plea agreement but rather the district court's judgment the district courts whether the district court abused its discretion in imposing the enhancement and the united states smits that and explains why there was no abuse of discretion in this in this area again with respect to preserved arguments the overarching standard is abuse of discretion within that not only loaded your honor it had a bullet in the chamber when you threw the gun it had a bull in the chamber because when the police found it it had a bullet in the chamber and that is another aspect that increases the risk of substantial broad daylight around four pm and vegan never contested at sentencing the program officers factual assertion that students are around all the time in this area and that's at page forty eight of conduct created a substantial risk of death or a bit of neither of those things did what how does putting the two of them together do it because if there is a perhaps an almost substantial risk in one and there's a that is exacerbated by his actions in for example leaving the firearm in the car throwing a loaded machine gun this is not just any form this is a machine gun with with one hole with one part of the trigger know empty the whole gun and the gone the gun was loaded with i believe twenty twenty one rounds of ammunition so this is certainly a dangerous activity and this course in  where the defendant was fleeing from police he tossed a firearm as he was running in that case the enhancement was upheld because there were school children or by accident a school bus and it happened in front of an apartment complex so they work on create facts that showed that there were other people there so it's there definitely was a creation of risk with respect to other  individuals i also want to know that at the district court level what one is leaving a loaded machine gun in the parking lot not something reckless that causes a risk of injury but what's the machine gun in the parking lot of a bank why is that not