Our town should double its fines for speeding. Studies show that higher fines result in less speeding, so increasing the fees should improve safety. There is no reason not to do this. If people can afford to pay a $50 fine, then surely they should be able to pay a $100 fine as well.

Question

Our town should double its fines for speeding. Studies show that higher fines result in less speeding, so increasing the fees should improve safety. There is no reason not to do this. If people can afford to pay a $50 fine, then surely they should be able to pay a $100 fine as well.

How sound is the reasoning given to support the claim “Our town should double its fines for speeding”? Explain your response in 3 to 5 sentences.

(4 points)s she believes it would harm downtown businesses, local families, and the environment.

Answer 1

The reasoning provided has logical merit in that it draws upon the deterrent effect of higher penalties to decrease undesirable behavior—in this case, speeding. The assumption is that if fines are increased, individuals will be more motivated to obey speed limits to avoid larger penalties. However, the argument oversimplifies the situation by assuming that everyone can afford to pay higher fines without considering economic disparities among individuals. The ability to pay a $50 fine does not imply the ability to pay a $100 fine for everyone. Additionally, the claim lacks evidence regarding the relationship between fine amounts and the economic or social impact on the community. A more nuanced argument would also consider the effectiveness of other interventions (such as increased enforcement or awareness campaigns) and whether doubling the fines is the most beneficial or equitable approach. Therefore, while the argument’s core rationale is coherent, it is not fully sound without addressing the potential negative consequences and exploring alternative solutions or supports.