Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:19:14.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Neutralization of Severe Penalties: Some Traffic Law Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2024

H. Laurence Ross
H. Laurence Ross*
Affiliation:
University of Denver
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Between the formal law of statute books and appellate courts and the informal law of routine dispositions intervene a variety of actors, exemplified by policemen and insurance adjusters, some of whom have not traditionally been regarded as “legal” actors. However, one of the most important contributions of sociology to the understanding of law has been the demonstration that the attitudes and values of these actors and the pressures embodied in their roles produce a comprehensible divergence between the prescriptions of the formal law and the regularities exhibited in the informal law (Skolnick, 1966; Ross, 1970). This paper discusses some instances of discrepancy between the formal and informal law when formal penalties are suddenly and greatly increased. Its principal hypothesis is that sharp increases in formal penalties tend to be subverted by contrary adjustments in the behavior of those who apply the law. The data to be presented come from four of my studies on the effectiveness of changing traffic laws. As these studies were not designed to test the present hypothesis, their evidence is indirect, and the presentation is exploratory rather than demonstrative.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , Spring 1976 , pp. 403 - 413
Copyright
Copyright © 1976 The Law and Society Association.

References

CAMPBELL, Donald T. and H. Laurence, ROSS (1968) “The Connecticut Crackdown on Speeding: Time-series Data in Quasi-Experimental Analysis,” 3 Law & Society Review 33.Google Scholar
GALLIHER, John F., McCARTNEY, James L., and Barbara E., BAUM (1974) “Nebraska's Marijuana Law: A Case of Unexpected Legislative Innovation,” 8 Law & Society Review 441.Google Scholar
GEERKEN, Michael R. and Walter R., GOVE (1975) “Deterrence: Some Theoretical Considerations,” 9 Law & Society Review 497.Google Scholar
PARSONS, Talcott (1951) The Social System. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press.Google Scholar
ROBERTSON, Leon S., Robert F., RICH, and H. Laurence, ROSS (1973) “Jail Sentences for Driving while Intoxicated in Chicago: A Judicial Action that Failed,” 8 Law & Society Review 55.Google Scholar
ROSS, H. Laurence (1970) Settled Out of Court: The Social Process of Insurance Claims Adjustment. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.Google Scholar
ROSS, H. Laurence (1973) “Law, Science and Accidents: The British Road Safety Act of 1967,” 2 Journal of Legal Studies 1.Google Scholar
ROSS, H. Laurence (1975) “The Scandinavian Myth: The Effectiveness of Drinking-and-Driving Legislation in Sweden and Norway,” 4 Journal of Legal Studies 285.Google Scholar
ROSS, H. Laurence and BLUMENTHAL, Murray (1974) “Sanctions for the Drinking Driver: An Experimental Study,” 3 Journal of Legal Studies 53.Google Scholar
ROSS, H. Laurence (1975) “Some Problems in Experimentation in a Legal Setting,” 10 American Sociologist 150.Google Scholar
SKOLNICK, Jerome (1966) Justice without Trial. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
TOBIAS, J. J. (1968) Crime and Industrial Society in the 19th Century. New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (1975) Alcohol Safety Action Projects: Evaluation of Operations, 1974. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
WILSON, James Q. (1975) Thinking about Crime. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar