|
Topic 67: The only way to improve road safety is to impose severe punishment for driving offences. Do you agree or disagree?
Road safety has long been an issue of concern to the public, and to the government. Nothing qualifies as a sufficient compensation when a road accident occurs. Despite the painstaking effort to reduce death, injury, and trauma across the world, many countries are seeing traffic accidents increase exponentially. In improving road safety, some people advocate harsh punishment. In my opinion, it is merely one of the many countermeasures and cannot prevent all criminal offences on the road.
In many cases, many automobile accidents occur not because drivers belittle or defy road regulations but because those regulations are unfamiliar to them. It is an everyday occurrence that rule-breaking acts and traffic crashes are linked to poor driving skills. Many drivers have limited experience in coping with different situations and an inaccurate estimation of the complexity of road conditions, despite having passed licence tests. It alerts people to the loopholes in policies, such as the loose control over car use, low requirements on driving training and low licence standards. In tackling those problems, it is imperative to require licence applicants to attend more safe-driving courses and pass strict tests.
Besides education, other endeavours, such as improving road infrastructure and transportation systems, are equally important. Road conditions should be improved to allow different users, including drivers, cyclists and pedestrians, to use roads safely. Other facilities, such as stoplights and stop signs, can be used wherever appropriate to curb speed driving. Furthermore, authorities can sponsor the research for road safety measures and effective precautions, such as identifying risk factors of different driving patterns. By translating these findings into policies and practices, the government is in a stronger position to protect vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users.
Wider intervention of local authorities is also recommended, such as increasing patrols in those areas where accident rate is high. Road regulations should be reassessed and revised regularly so as to combat road offences more effectively. When the existing policies fail to regulate road users' behaviour, tightening the control is preferred. However, as suggested before, strict standards require full compliance. Without regulations closely observed, standards are in fact vain.
It can therefore be made clear that punishment is not the only way to cut the accident rate and improve people's safety on road. Some other measures, such as increasing road users' knowledge of rules and defence driving skills, improving road infrastructure and enforcing compliance with standards, are all important
painstaking = diligent = careful = conscientious
trauma = suffering = pain
exponentially = dramatically = markedly
harsh = unsympathetic = unforgiving = severe: = strict
countermeasure = preventive measure/action = precaution
loophole = mistake = escape = dodge
besides = apart from = aside from
sponsor = fund = subsidise = support
vulnerable = defenceless = susceptible
tighten = increase = boost
compliance = conforming
vain = worthless = futile = ineffective
Topic 68: Police in Britain do not carry guns. Some people believe that unarmed police are unable to protect citizens, but some suggest that arming the police will lead to a surge in violence in society. Discuss those two views.
Whether to arm the police is a contentious subject. While some people maintain that unarmed police are unable to protect law-abiding citizens, others reject this notion, believing that it leads to a drop in violence in society. There are several factors that account for the stark contrast between the two thoughts.
The primary concern on armed police is that it would increase the potential for miscarriages of justice and mistaken shootings of innocent civilians. The legislation in many countries is supportive of this concern. Laws protect citizens from torture or cruel treatment and also their rights on arrest or detainment. If armed, the police will be less likely to think twice before pulling the trigger. They can easily get away with private execution by inventing a legitimate excuse, such as self-defence. The chance of a shoot-out would naturally rise, causing many preventable injuries or losses of life.
Arming the police might also add fuel to the gun culture. Nowadays, perhaps nothing is worse than the continued rise in the gun ownership rate. Arming the police can never redress the imbalance but worse, give criminals a motivator to carry guns even for minor crimes. On the other hand, in those communities that are otherwise peaceful, armed police are intimidating and the fear of crime will spread wildly. It would lead to further demand on private gun ownership, and expose members of the public to higher risk.
Arming police is therefore not advisable in most cases but only allowed in exceptional circumstances. For example, in those areas where armed crimes are rampant, armed police protect not only the public but also themselves from the potential attack. It gives the police the leverage in their combat against criminals, especially those hardened criminals. Firearms also serve as a deterrent to would-be offenders. If street patrols in some neighbourhoods are routinely armed, it helps cut the rates of crime.
The access to weapons should therefore be limited, for the simple reason that carrying guns leads to higher likelihood of mistaken shootings and to higher levels of violence. Carrying guns is only accepted when the police are in conflict situations and confrontations with criminals.
mistaken = incorrect
execution = the death sentence = killing = capital punishment
preventable = unnecessary = avoidable
add fuel to = fuel = invigorate = encourage
redress = restore = remedy
motivator = incentive = impetus
intimidating = daunting = frightening = scary
deterrent = warning
would-be = possible = likely = prospective = potential
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
