Post your essay. Get expert feedback. For free.We're trying to help students improve their writing the hard way. Do you know students who want critical essay reviews from a professor of English Literature? Click like to share. Click here to sign up and post your own essay. We offer no paid services. All reviews are completely free.
How To Improve Road Safety Essay - With A Free Essay Review
PROMPT: The Only Way To Improve Road Safety Is To Impose Severe Punishment For Driving Offences. Do You Agree Or Disagree?
As the number of traffic accidents has increased dramatically recently, the responsibility of the government for road safety has never been heavier. It is argued the only way the authority can fulfill this responsibility is to repress traffic offenders by means of stiff punishment. However, from my point of view, road safety cannot be ensured with this sole method but the combination of various actions.
The advantages of punishing traffic law-breakers are undeniable in many aspects. First of all, once a fearful punishment is imposed and, it suppresses people’s attempt to make the offence a second time. Moreover, an individual’s penalty can be considered a mirror at which other people can look and try not to do the same thing. However, this method sometimes causes unwanted danger on the road as people who have made the offence will attempt to avoid being arrested by, for example, speeding up or turning round when they see the police.
It is obvious the driving offences is not the only reason that leads to road accidents. One crucial thing that the government can accomplish to ensure road safety is to increase the quality of traffic facilities. In many developing countries, traffic system in rural areas is not fully built with roads being too narrow or inadequate number of road signs, which can easily lead to vehicles’ collision. Another important thing that can be done is to educate people with traffic law and safety. This is especially necessary to the young generation because they account for a large proportion of traffic offences. In addition, various methods to reduce the number of vehicles on the road can be taken. Many countries invest in public transport system while some increase traffic fees.
Based on the reasons above, it can be concluded the severe punishment cannot be the only way to achieve road safety. Other methods should be carefully considered in order to reach accident-free traffic.
The Only Way To Improve Road Safety Is To Impose Severe Punishment For Driving Offences. Do You Agree Or Disagree?
The prompt here presents you with a silly, obviously false proposition. So your challenge when faced with this kind of prompt is to figure out how to write an interesting essay about it. To write an interesting essay, you need to figure out something to say beyond the obvious fact that there are other things one can do to improve road safety (e.g., close the roads!).
One way to make your essay interesting would be to demonstrate why the proposition is obviously false in terms of the assumptions it makes, rather than by just offering an alternative way to improve road safety. You attempt to do that, I think, in the first sentence of your third paragraph: "It is obvious that driving offences is not the only reason that leads to road accidents." That is indeed the right type of claim to make in this kind of essay. It's probably the most important claim, and should be more fully developed. You go on to demonstrate that there are other things that can be done to improve safety. What you need to do first, I think, is make an explicit argument about the logical problem with the proposition. I.e., specifically highlight the fact that you are pointing out the flaw in the proposition. (With a statement like "The proposition is flawed because it assumes without justification that driving offenses are a major cause of traffic accidents and the only cause that can be addressed.") You could possibly develop this approach to the prompt by asking, What amended version of the proposition would be true? The best way to reduce the number of accidents in which traffic offenses are implicated would be to impose severe punishment for driving offenses? Perhaps that is true, but this amended proposition also makes an assumption about the efficacy of punishment as a deterrent. It would help to provide evidence of such efficacy, but of course you wouldn't have access to that kind of information in a test situation. However, you can still point out that that information would be needed before you can make an informed opinion. "I don't know" is sometimes the best answer, if you can demonstrate why it is not possible to know.
Sometimes the apparently easiest prompts are the most difficult. Anyone can come up with a whole list of proposals to improve road safety. (One could improve road safety by mandating that cars be subject to performance checks every few months, by forbidding nighttime driving, or forbidding driving in the rain, or driving during the twilight hours. One could improve road safety [apparently] by only allowing women to drive. One could improve road safety by reducing the speed limit, by making driving lessons more rigorous, by policing existing laws more thoroughly, by making the consumption of alcohol illegal, by improving the rail service, and so on.) The strength of your essay is that you recognize you need to more than that. You do three things in your essay: 1) You point out how you think what is proposed might help, and interestingly a way in which it might have unintended consequences; 2) You point out a logical flaw in the proposition; and (3) you give counterexamples. It was a good idea to include point (1), though what would make your essay really stand out from others would be the elaboration of the one claim (point 2) that you here make only in passing.