While traffic signs help implement a system, traffic citations are what enforce it. Sometime after the introduction of road signage, the need arose for a way to assure that drivers would follow these rules. Citations became a way to essentially scare people into respecting the law. Punishment is a good enforcer – especially when it’s monetary. But in order to be effective the punishment must be significant enough so that people are not inclined to break the law; at the same time, it must remain reasonable. But who or what determines what reasonable is? Surely it does not mean the same thing to a person of the lower class compared to someone of the upper class. And even if a median was reached, the fine may not be significant enough to someone who is rich therefore they are more likely to break the law.
Taking it a step further, it is a common belief that the only criminals are the ones who get caught. Police officers cannot possibly be present for every traffic violation thus drivers break the rules all the time. Citations have only partially solved the problem of driver safety and people continue to jeopardize their lives and the lives of others by not respecting traffic laws.
If financial punishment is unfair or ineffective based on one's ability to pay, what other measures could be employed? Are there other ways (traditional or innovative) that can be revisited or invented to induce individuals to follow widely accepted and necessary (for safety) norms of behavior?
ReplyDeleteThere already is an alternative punishment: community service. Then again, there are different forms of community service, some which are more demanding. But setting a standard would be ineffective because not everyone is equally physically or mentally capable.
ReplyDeleteMaybe there could be mandatory sessions that reinforce the importance of driver's safety?