True. Apologies.
And you might have made the same remark when the regulars became much more than just "confrontational", hundreds of posts back. But I guess you'll consider this another confrontational post...
Apology accepted, and no I don't - apart from the last comment. I've no idea why you decided to vent your spleen on me and I do object to that. I am perfectly willing to accept that using the BRS could be justified, but only if there is absolutely no alternative. My only bone of contention is whether the risk, however small, to persons on the ground should be considered not worthy of consideration, i.a.w. the law and not worth planning for! To say the aviation low flying rules laws of any state are over-restrictive shows a dangerous arrogance.
IMO, any safety device is worth having, BRS included.
[Shame no-one makes a backpack version for motorcyclists. Then riders of high speed bikes could disregard the highway code and speed limits. For example, if they do screw up in town and all else fails, they can save themselves by leaving the bike to it's own devices... Pedestrians etc ? Just collateral damage.
].