The thing is it's a very difficult test to carry out as each eventuality is different.
With a crash helmet you know it's protecting the cranium but a neck brace is between the body and head and the neck can be subjected to a variety of torsional stresses in a crash that a neck brace can exacerbate.
That's why the MSA have probably rightly taken the objective route and not the subjective opinion which is what the users of neck braces have to take because there is no definitive evidence available.
I think it would be unfair to ask the BKDA to approach the MSA (it's nothing to do with the ABkC, they don't write the regulations)because the opinions among drivers are quite divided.
You're asking for a legislation that is not necessary because you can easily make the decision yourself, no one is actually saying you cannot wear one.
I think we sensibly know a bone dome and visor is essential.
The BKDA represents ALL drivers and the vast majority are not licence holders, so they make their own decision unless the track or club made it compulsory.
That would leave them wide open to litigation and that's why the ABkC couldn't make that decision, they can't afford to be sued. (Hmmm)
It's better that individuals and parents make the decision on a piece of gear that has not been proven to protect in all or the vast majority of cases.
|
|