I'm not sure it is the enforcement that is a problem, at least from the MSA point of view, but the consistent deterrence of those deliberately driving on a kerb, a 'professional foul' as it were.
For the MSA the problem comes when the driver insists that the errors were simply that and they rule in the name of justice that since a novice committed the same number of errors and wasn't punished, then this driver should not get a greater penalty.
It's the same with contact driving. A really good driver may tap a 'known' other driver simply as an indicator that they are there, in the sure knowledge that the tap will not unduly unsettle the driver. The not quite so good driver tries to do the same thing and sends the competitor wide or off the track. The novice may whack the driver in front without any intention of wrongdoing at all.
Which one deserves punishment? (Deserves rather than qualifies for, all deliberate contact qualifies for punishment).
This is why the 'easy' way is simply to ignore the crime and let it all sort itself out, which would be perfectly valid except that there is a core of drivers who abuse the freedoms in order to "WIN".
Indeed, in other threads it has been suggested that if everyone can 'cheat' (drive outside the white lines for advantage) then no-one is suffering. But then if everyone can build a non-compliant engine, does that mean we should stop scrutineering? Recent experience at Dunks suggests that knowing that use of the kerb can be detected,and that something is done about it does reduce kerb usage.
And perhaps we need to use a bit of common sense in defining a kerb and in using them. Creating a kerb many feet wide and than saying that there is no penalty for using it seems daft, but only as daft as saying that every infringement on every kerb must be monitored.
|
|