Unintended consequences in a world where we think driving is freedom

Comment & Analysis: There are few things more frustrating to me than hearing a punishment is being made harsher to reduce offending. The fine can be a million. If it’s not enforced, it makes no difference at all.

The account “Is it a Bike Lane?” on Bluesky said: “Can I shock you? I don’t think prison sentences for dangerous drivers are too lenient. Deterrence depends more on *likelihood* of being caught. So massively increase enforcement, not sentences, to end [the] sense of impunity And LONG driving bans. End the ‘exceptional circumstances’ scam.”

To expand on this thought, and disagree with the “Is it a bike lane?” account on one point: Like fines and prison sentences, the length of a driving ban makes no difference, at least in Ireland. As a rule, people simply ignore the law. – 76% of drivers who lost their license simply refused to surrender it.

Combine that with the RSA’s well-intentioned but woefully poorly thought-through advertisement that made headlines recently. The ad was informed by research through focus groups, and determined that young male drivers “perceived their licence as being the key to their independence and they indicated that the prospective loss of their licence could fundamentally shift their driving behaviours.” Not being able to drive was therefore framed as a burden on everyone around you. What is the more likely outcome of the advertisement: that young male drivers will drive more safely, or that they would be even more unlikely to actually comply with a driving ban?

One of the things qualitative researchers must take into account is social desirability bias (that’s a Wikipedia link with plain language; just search the term if you’re interested in a more academic explanation), and I have to wonder if it was sufficiently considered here.

What is the likelihood of the young men admitting to an interviewer from the RSA that a driving ban would make little to no difference to whether they drive, how often, and how?

Theoretically, if they were truly unable to drive any more, then yes, of course, they may be moved to change their behaviour. But let’s be real: the only thing that advertisement accomplished was to make it less likely that people would choose transport modes other than driving. It also made it more likely they’d keep driving no matter how many bans the courts slap on them, so as not to be a burden on those around them.