I'm more concerned with drunk or texting drivers than getting eaten by a tiger. Does that mean I shouldn't be worried if someone lets a tiger loose in the park?

That depends. The tiger might get hit by a drunk driver, then eat them when they get out of the car, thus reducing your overall level of personal risk.

You prove exactly the point. People get all up in arms over silly things when there are much bigger concerns in the world.

Someone shows a video of a RC jet flying extremely fast and the assumption is this guy is endangering the public and has no regard for safety of others.

Lets just get congress to waste time implementing laws for both fast flying RC planes and another one to make it illegal for your tiger to eat a person.

What if there's a tiger with a team of professional large animal trainers abiding by all sensible guidelines?

except for letting loose the tiger in the first place.

The hypothetical situation I'm proposing is if the tiger is not let loose, but is being tended to by experienced people.

We should also calculate the risk if the tiger was being flown round the park on a jet powered drone, just to cover all bases.

On a probability basis, sure, bad driving is much more likely to kill you. That doesn't mean that jet RC flying like that isn't shockingly irresponsible.

You assume this person is shockingly irresponsible. Do you have proof? What's on the other side of those trees?

I assume that one does not simply dive into the RC world with a jet turbine. Instead this individual has probably had a lot of practice with slower planes, does not want to injury anyone, and is not doing this in Central Park NY

Interesting that you think the burden of proof should be on me that flying a couple litres of kerosene around the sky at 370mph is not obviously unsafe.

I have no doubt the pilot is experienced, and that the area in general is clear.

The burden of proof should be on you, if you want to prove that the flying was irresponsible. That's how that works.

So, the actual argument I made was that just because more people were likely to die from drink driving (probability-wise), it didn't mean flying the RC wasn't shockingly irresponsible.

Note that I didn't agree with the claim that this specific flight was irresponsible, just that the fact that more people might die from drink driving is basically irrelevant.

So no, the burden of proof is not on me.

I carefully noted your original argument. That's why I said that the burden of proof should be on you, if you want to prove that the flying was irresponsible.

He doesn't have any burden of proof, especially not to random people on the internet.

He does have to make sure he flies safely, but that's his concern. Relax and enjoy the show. :-)

The RC jet flying that you see in this video requires an immense amount of knowledge, experience, preparation, and flying skill—far more than to fly a normal electric RC plane or multirotor, or even to drive an automobile. There is nothing I saw in this video that looks remotely irresponsible.

Most irresponsible behavior shown on youtube doesn't affect you personally.