Mark,
From a publisher's standpoint, I do like the way you think!
Don,
Picture a par four with two bunkers down the left side of the landing area and two bunkers down the right side of the landing area. the challenge on that hole is to hit it straight down the middle, avoiding the bunkers. If one fails, then the bunkers penalize the golfer who failed. There is nothing wrong with that, by the way, other than for the majority of golfers it becomes redundant and provides only one option (hit down the middle) for everyone. Those bunkers serve as nothing but penalty. The challenge is hit down the middle or avoid the bunkers.
Picture the same hole with a central bunker in the middle. That hazard challenges the golfer to gain an advantage (and also offers four different ways to play the same hole). If the golfer fails, then they are penalized by being in the sand.
So, the four bunkers along the sides of example A penalize the golfer who is trying to keep it in the middle whereas the bunker in example B challenges the golfer to gain an advantage by shortening the hole or offering up a better angle to the pin, etc. [size=78%]The first example, straight down the middle, does not offer up alternatives.[/size]
Bottom line is that in either case, the hazard will dole out penalty once you are in it. I would just prefer that one is rewarded for playing over or around it with aggressive play rather than being penalized for failing to hit the only shot possible.