FRA Members ratio in races

[ba-ba]

I'm curious: if this is about safety, there must be data about the number of people banned for not carrying kit and if they were FRA members or not. FRA members are just as liable, I think, to not carry kit than members. Unfortunately enforcing kit regs is extremely patchy and maybe stricter enforcement might lead to better compliance, between both members and non-members.

In the last 2 years all disciplinary actions have been against non-FRA members.
There is also some evidence (though where it is I am not too sure) that membership of an organisation results in greater adherence/awareness of the rules. Obviously being an FRA member doesn't automatically make you someone worth trusting on the fells - some FRA members I know I definitely wouldn't trust!
I stated these two points in my earlier tl:dr post.

Stricter enforcement is in place at some races (see for example Edale Skyline for kit; Trigger for pre-race vetting) and maybe these incidences of best practise could be spread further. However there's always people intent that they know best (e.g. I believe an experienced Spine racer was DQ'd this year)

Personally? For a smallish evening race I wouldn't alter entry fees. If I organised a Lakeland Classic or the two races organised above, that are more arduous, have become more 'bucket list' type events or are well subscribed, I would. I think there's more room for nuance here than there is in the GPS debate.