To say the aviation low flying rules laws of any state are over-restrictive shows a dangerous arrogance.
Didn't say that (I think). I do, however, believe that the "glide free" rule is broken by most pilots on most flights. It also seems it was not at all relevant in this case.
Every pilot has to make their own assessment of risk, weighing the multitude of risks against each other where they are in conflict. To me, the very, very, very low probability of even hitting someone on the ground under parachute, let alone injuring them, means that I will not be concerned with it when compared to considering my own life as being directly and immediately threatened. Because that is the situation the pilot is in when he/she pulls the chute. For him/her, in that situation, of course there is "no alternative". What else? No amount of "Monday morning quarter-backing" will change that the pilot felt his life in immediate danger when he pulled.
If I should ever have to pull, I fully expect it to be in a situation that - in hindsight - will seem utterly trivial and completely avoidable. The statistics of aviation accidents (in GA as well as in professional flying) are just tremendously tilted towards that outcome, because most of us humans are quite fallible - even if not all see it (on this forum, especially, it seems). But I'll be alive to beat myself up about having been a complete idiot.