Yet he still succeeded in his mission. He saved the victim without harm to himself or others.
I guess the rules really weren't all that important after all. It's not like they are laws of physics or something. They are simply rules written by men, inherently fallible human beings.(With the obvious exception of your magnificent self of course.)
Perhaps you should write the rules, then we would all know that they are perfect, for you could produce no other result.
This time.
What you're saying is that if someone doesn't get caught or killed it is ok.
If you are in charge of a rescue team do you want a guy on it that acts on his own and shows disregard for protocols? Face it, if he is willing to put his life in UNNECESSARY risk then how much concern will he have for yours or the other team members?
Ever see someone doing something blatantly unsafe only to have them tell you that they always do it that way?
So does their lack of injury to date mean that they are actually correct in what they're doing?
Would you allow your kids to do something unsafe only to have them tell you that they did it and didn't get hurt?
How many times you gonna run your car after the oil light comes on during operation just cuz you did it once and nothing bad happened?
Do you want your surgeon taking shortcuts because the last time he did it nothing bad happened?
Not suffering a bad consequence this time doesn't excuse following protocols in critical tasks.
This guy was selfish. He was more concerned about how he would feel about the girls fate if she fell than he was about her or his fellow rescuers.