Simply put, whenever someone willfully puts someone else's life in danger by whatever means it is not a good thing.
Let bring a difference aspect of All question.
As a climber, you want to climb. Deeply climb every thing you see. You are in front of a piece of rock, not a route that some one rate in a way or an other. You have a challenge and you want to do it. Between reckless comportment or bozo comportment, known for being kind of an idiot, and safe climbing, there is a big difference. If you go to court, and had to draw a line...where are you going to make it. It is what I call an acceptable risk. In an acceptable risk, you most have a solution to get out of a problem: Mountaineering, Freedom of the hill was, in the gold time, fifth edition and before, a bible of all solution to get out of a problem. Solution or good or not, it was in the book. As you came back from climbing, you take the book and understand some subtlety of climbing. You understand that climbing a crack in a layback can be a sandbag, but climbing it with hand jamming is 5.6.
Ounce you have a solution, there is the counterpart, where someone don't know the solution. When some one have an accident, you learn the limit of your technique. Accident of north America was wrote before to understand when a climber was climbing over his limit. When the risk is too high, when it is not an acceptable risk. Climbing alone in a snowstorm on pinnacle the first year of ice climbing is not an acceptable risk. Climbing with an experience climber could be acceptable.
On the other side of the climber, there is the company who don't want to have law suite. They want to make money, that climbing be popular, and, as placing pro is dangerous...put a bolt. They want to place bolt every where, not only where a fall can cause injury over your acceptable risk. You don't have to learn safety, but follow a set of rules like the avy post to know when to climb or not. I climbed with a very good kid
and he told me that he want to have fun and lead pitches...he pull me out of stance two or three times by pulling too much on the rope has he belay. Not knowing how to belay and wanting to take the sharp end of the rope won't be, by any consideration, an acceptable risk. If similar climber bring there friend without knowing what is an acceptable risk, I think that it is a criminal negligence.
N.B. I know some good climber who don't like to climb seven pitch in 5.7 to have one move of 5.12. They prefer to bolt small cliff with many move of 5.10, 5.12 and play in it. A new generation follow there path and learn to play in sport route without learning what is an acceptable risk. A good sport climber by choice and a spotra climber is not the same.