I'm not saying King of the Hill should be nessasaraly be banned, like I said earlier, I love it too! The point is I believe that legaly the speedways that allow it in it's current format, are playing with fire. Take this for example; if a burgalar comes onto my property, and injures himself, while on my property, I am legaly responsible and could be sued. In fact there was a court case like that, in Ontario 6 or 7 months ago. Do I think that it is right that this should be the case? NO! but this IS the case!. It is fast becoming a society, where everyone is responsible for me, exept me. I know that I am playing devils advocate here, but I think that this is a good discussion, and these points are valid ones, and they should be raised.

i believe it will come down to the tracks insurance carrier.

This si a great discussion.

I am no insurance salesman or litigator, but I do believe Silverstone is right here. It is your risk, and you do sign a waiver, but that means nothing. I know a motocross track in ontario ahd a little boy break his back and they sued the track...I am not sure that there is an outcome yet...but the kid and his parent signed the waiver...

Do the officials happen to talk to the drivers before they go out? Like just to say forwarn them that it isn't like a normal road and to be careful? Kinda give em the heads up to watch it?

I am no insurance salesman or litigator, but I do believe Silverstone is right here. It is your risk, and you do sign a waiver, but that means nothing. I know a motocross track in ontario ahd a little boy break his back and they sued the track...I am not sure that there is an outcome yet...but the kid and his parent signed the waiver...

In Ontario (and perhaps all of Canada) a parent cannot sign away the rights of a minor child.  Period.  The value of a waiver is to limit the monetary award if a court finds the track liable.  The track could still be forced into expensive litigation - and they likely have insurance to guard against that cost.