'Rules is rules’, is counterproductive. If rules aren’t fit for purpose there must be a means to effect change. As someone already commented, bad rules breed rule breakers.
Inherently if a procedure is fit for purpose & you don't follow it, you’re increasing risk. There are very obvious risks in training & operational flying; although I doubt you'd be carpeted for overstressing an airframe, whilst avoiding something nasty approaching you at high speed!
If the raw material was well selected, the training appropriate & people are still behaving like dicks; you must look to the culture. Some hard calls need to be made. Military maintainers have had their epiphany & are making great strides in embedding an open reporting culture & a fair & just culture to allow this to function.
Unfortunately civil law is nether fair or just. If you have an organisational culture in which people can speak out & concerns are listened to (& very importantly are addressed professionally), fewer people may find themselves in the Puma crew member’s terrible situation.