At the end of the film, Duvall confronts Douglas’ character and it is clear that the endgame would have been him killing his wife and child.
“Falling Down” was the liberal explanation for the “angry white men” reaction to the Clinton administration which ultimately resulted in the Gingrich revolution.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/16/michael-crowley-barack-obama
Falling Down came out in February 1993. Per IMDB, the movie was filmed during the L.A. riots in late April of 1992).
Also, if the intent is to kill his wife, why did he have the water gun and not the real thing when confronted by Duvall? He also told the Duvall character that either he could kill Duvall's caracter, or Duvall could kill him, and his little girl could get his (Douglas') insurance.
It may have been a liberal slam on the angry white man, but the timing is wrong for Clinton.
That was the reason for my original post. While it may have been intended as a slam, it had the opposite effect on me (akin to Archie Bunker). I took it as a man pushed too far. He only hurt those who threatened him physically (bangers and neo nazi). Otherwise his wrath was at the system - easily identified with. He knew he'd done wrong, and deliberately committed suicide by cop before hurting his family.