Whenever the NHL’s general managers meet, the topic of fighting seems to pop up in media and on blogs and message boards. "Get rid of the instigator!" is the battle cry of traditionalists who want vigilante justice to rule the day.

Questionable hits are certainly part of that. Many believe that removing the instigator would curtail many of these hits. For a while, I thought that might be the answer, too. But another sport’s recent "have at it" policy shows that letting athletes police their sport with in-game justice can have scary results.

Of course, we're talking about NASCAR’s decision to return to their roots this season and allow its drivers to bump and bang more, using their cars as tools to resolve disputes. The early returns aren't good, with Carl Edwards’s long-running feud with Brad Keselowski turned ugly when Edwards sent his adversary airborne, purposely wrecking the No. 12 as payback for a scary incident last season when the tables were turned and Keselowski sent Edwards for a ride.

Now there's a big difference between 3,400-pound vehicles traveling at 190 mph or more being used as weapons and two hockey players throwing punches to resolve a dispute, but the fact remains that now that NASCAR has opened the door for a return to vigilante justice, they will have a hard time shutting it. Case in point: Edwards got "probation" — the equivalent of the NHL’s $1,000 fine on players making millions of dollars.

There's no denying something has to be done about the brutal hits that are leaving many of the sports best players concussed. Hits like Philadelphia’s Mike Richards’ on Florida’s David Booth, while currently not illegal by letter of the law, show blatant disregard and respect for a peer.

Richard’s actions pale in comparison to those of Matt Cooke, whose history of questionable plays makes it hard to believe he wasn't out to hurt Boston’s Marc Savard. His hit is punishable now — forget about needing some new head shot rule.

But in my opinion, the answer isn't having a 240-pound goon given free reign to patrol the ice and respond to any iffy actions. First, you need to let the players know that borderline hits, while brutally exciting and craved — type David Booth or Mike Richards into YouTube and you'll see, despite each player having several highlight-reel efforts during their careers, which clips come to the top — are altering the careers of some of the game’s brightest stars.

Second, the players need to answer the bell when the player they wronged calls them out. Booth did not receive an instigator when he dropped the gloves with Richards March 3 to close the door on the incident. Tuomo Ruutu faced the music when Darcy Tucker wanted retribution for a hit from behind by Ruutu on the Colorado winger that left Tucker concussed and the Carolina forward suspended. None of these players received an instigator because all four were willing combatants. It's not vigilante justice if everyone — even the league and the officials — agree that it's the best way to diffuse the situation between evenly matched foes.

Removing disrespectful hits from the game will not take checking out of the game — but it will prolong and improve the careers of dynamic players like Booth and Savard, whose night-by-night wizardry is better to watch than a five-second clip that leaves them prone on the ice. 

The NHL, unlike NASCAR, has realized that too much money is at stake and its sport is too competitive for the players to be expected to decide for themselves what actions are within reason. Now everyone else needs to realize that justice can be served on and off the ice without removing the instigator.