To What Extent is it Justifiable to Deviate from Fundamental Essay

To What Extent is it Justifiable to sidetrack from Fundamental Principles of Criminal Law by Creating Driving Offences of Strict Liability, in the Interests of Maintaining Road Safety - seek ExampleWithout an iota of doubt, it whoremaster be said that the concept of law, and for that purpose criminal law, has come to rise up a midpoint between these two schools of thoughts by setting principles that both give freedom to great deal to behave as individual beings and also protect the beguile of other tidy sum.Typical examples of such rules and regulations that can be identified as directly catering for both the freedom of the bearer and the interest of the bearer are driving laws on the possession of insurance and valid drivers license by car users. Such laws are in place to ensure that as much as people have the freedom to drive any car of their choice, they also have the needed training and certificate that will put other way users at safety. Notwithstanding the presence of such road user laws, which have been inculcated into existing criminal laws, there are studies and case laws that suggest increases in driving offenses and road user related offenses. This essay has therefore been written to hold a debate on the defense in deviating from fundamental principles of criminal law to create driving offenses of strict liability that will be in place with the interest of maintaining road safety.There are a number of thematic profound arguments that can be developed from the question under discussion. These are considered thematic legal arguments because they seem to reprimand issues that could be given different legal interpretations, an analysis of which can lead to a successful induction on the justification of deviating from principles of criminal law by creating driving offenses of strict liability in the interest of maintaining road safety. These thematic legal arguments have thus been discussed as follows.