This is a memo that is meant to elaborate on the subject matter of the above in relation to the welfare of the society. The country through its legislature has seen it fit to institute such a law owing to the frequency of road accidents in the recent past. This legislation is aimed at deterring the population from committing such an offense and at the same time punishing those who have breached the law. This legislation is not only aimed at punishing offenders but also deterring potential ones from committing such a crime.
The concept of deterrence in legislation is a strategy that is meant to prevent people doing an action that is not legal to another party or the government. It warns of serious repercussion if such action is taken. The party undertaking it would receive punishment from the party that warned of such a move. This is to say that choices have consequences (Freedman, 2004). Deterrence holds that a punishment slammed on offenders would deter them from committing further crime and consequently instill fear to potential offenders from doing such an action. Deterrents have been used in various states with various modes of governance in the world. It has been used and has been proven as an effective policy in creating a society free from various crimes and deviance behaviors (Zagare, 2004).
Deterrence is both a classical concept and a positive one. In the classical view of human beings, in the society, the believers of this school of thought argued that a human being has the capacity and ability of free will. They suggested that the punishment could help in deterring crime as long as the punishment was in proportion of the crime committed and done in a timely manner. (Zagare & Kilgour, 2000). Deterrence has been known to produce a positive effect in maintaining law and order across the world. Though deterrence is not primarily aimed at increasing the severity of punishment to offenders, success in its application lies in the certainty of the threats made to offenders if they happen to commit an offense. Deterrence is not aimed at inflicting severe punishments to the offenders. It aims at making it certain that corrective measures of offense would be applied and in a timely manner and at the same time creating an extensive system that would ensure that offenders would not go away without being caught and prosecuted accordingly (Vold, et al. 1998).
This piece of legislation has come in time when the government is grappling with issues concerning road safety since they have been on the rise in the recent past. Part of the punishment that I would propose to be put in place in preventing the use of phones while driving is by imposing moderate fines and prison time of about two months for those who will fail to pay the fine. This level of punishment would make the lawbreakers from indulging further in such a crime and to stop potential offenders from breaking this law. This law would contribute in reducing cases of accidents since motorist would now concentrate on the road without distraction. The law would have a deterrence effect on most motorists. Those who will still break the law regardless of punishment for two consecutive times would on the third time be subject to both punishments. This is to say that they would be fined and at the same time receive a jail term of two months.
In order to sealing loopholes within the legal system that lead to offenders running away with unsafe driving practices, I would advise the government to introduce several roadblocks and deploy an increased number of traffic police. This will help in curbing the practice of talking on the phone while driving and ensure that every offender has been brought to book and punished accordingly.
References
Freedman, L. (2004). Deterrence. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Vold, G. Bernard, T. and Snipes, J. (1998) Theoretical Criminology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Zagare, Frank C. (2004), "Reconciling Rationality with Deterrence: A Re-examination of the Logical Foundations of Deterrence Theory", Journal of Theoretical Politics 16 (2): 107–141
Zagare, F. C., & Kilgour, D. M. (2000). Perfect deterrence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
