But it is not simply an accident. It's not just legal mumbo-jumbo to distinquish between various types of activities and the degree of risk inherent in and/or assumed by those who participate or choose (paying or not) to gather and watch as opposed to those who are uninvolved but get killed or injured without assuming any risk.
But in a day and age where everyone knows what goes on at an airfield, especially but not necessarily whilst during an airshow, shouldn't anyone who drives their car close to an airfield factor in the additional risk that something aircraft related might happen to them whilst transiting its zone of influence?
In the same way, if I choose to drive past a school without slowing down and run a pupil over, the justification for my speed being that it was closed for the Summer holiday, it seems right that my risk assessment should be called into question because, closed or not, schools are "danger" areas that, regardless, warrant slower speeds.
But, at this point in time, I agree, that argument seems a stretch....