With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". ” United States v. Foree, 43 F.3d 1572, 1576 (11th Cir.1995) (quoting Gates, 462 U.S. at 233, 103 S.Ct. at 2329). An affidavit that recites the statements of an informant can provide a substantial basis for a finding of probable cause because “ ‘an explicit and detailed description of alleged wrongdoing, along with a statement that the event was observed firsthand, entitles the informant’s tip to greater weight than might otherwise be the case.’ ” United States v. Brundidge, 170 F.3d 1350, 1353 (11th Cir.1999) (quoting Gates, 462 U.S. at 234, 103 S.Ct. at 2330). Although independent corroboration aids in assessing the informant’s veracity, it is not required in every case. Id. The tip is corroborated when there exists a disincentive for the informant to lie. Foree, 43 F.3d at 1576 (<HOLDING>). The affidavit recited facts sufficient to

A: holding a tip by informant who claimed to witness wrongdoing sufficient to establish reasonable suspicion
B: holding an informants tip if questionable can be corroborated by the observation of lawful conduct
C: holding that the elevated class c felony penalty for the offense of criminal recklessness by shooting a firearm from a vehicle into a place where people are likely to gather did not shock public sentiment or violate the judgment of reasonable people because among other things the use of a vehicle would make it less likely that the person would be identified which in turn would make it more likely that the offense would be committed
D: holding that a tip is corroborated when given in circumstances under which the informant is unlikely to lie because a falsehood would likely be discovered in short order and favors falsely curried would dissipate rapidly
D.