Deterring Unsafe Driving Is Everyone's Responsibility

A September 2026 distracted-driving enforcement campaign in British Columbia prompted a DriveSmartBC visitor to question whether police should do more to educate drivers rather than simply issue tickets.

It is a reasonable question, but it raises a larger issue: who is responsible for deterring unsafe driving? Police enforcement is important, but it is only one part of the answer. Government, driver educators, road-safety organizations, employers, families and drivers themselves all have a role to play.

The objective is not to issue tickets. It is to change behaviour and prevent collisions, injuries and deaths. That requires more than enforcement alone.

What Do the Enforcement Numbers Tell Us?

According to the BC Highway Patrol's September 2026 enforcement results, officers recorded 1,587 enforcement actions for handheld-device use, compared with 734 in September 2025. Actions involving occupant restraints, including seatbelts, increased from 456 to 826.

These are substantial differences, but they do not necessarily mean that distracted driving or seatbelt non-compliance became more common. The figures reflect enforcement activity and the violations officers encountered. Staffing, the time devoted to enforcement, locations and other operational factors can affect the totals.

Nor do the figures tell us whether the campaign changed drivers' behaviour. A driver who receives a ticket may stop committing the offence, while another may simply regard the penalty as a cost of doing business.

To evaluate the campaign's success, we need to look beyond the number of enforcement actions. Did the targeted behaviour become less common? Were fewer people injured or killed? Those are more meaningful measures of road-safety progress.

What Is Deterrence?

Deterrence is intended to discourage behaviour by making people aware of its consequences.

In traffic safety, consequences can include fines, penalty points, licence consequences and increased insurance costs. More importantly, unsafe driving can cause a collision that injures or kills someone.

Specific deterrence refers to the effect on someone who has already been caught. A driver who receives a distracted-driving ticket may decide not to use a handheld device while driving again.

General deterrence refers to the effect on other drivers. When people believe that an offence may be detected and that consequences will follow, they may be less inclined to take the risk themselves.

Neither outcome is guaranteed. Some drivers change their habits after a ticket; others continue taking the same risks. Some believe they can use a phone safely or that the chance of being caught is too small to worry about.

Effective deterrence therefore involves more than imposing penalties. Drivers must understand the risks, accept that the rules apply to them and develop habits that make safe behaviour routine.

Is It the Police's Job to Educate Drivers?

The visitor who prompted this article suggested that police should do more educational work instead of relying on enforcement. Police officers certainly can educate drivers during traffic stops. They can explain why a law exists, describe the risks and offer advice on avoiding future violations.

Public enforcement campaigns can also draw attention to dangerous behaviour. However, a roadside stop is a limited opportunity for education. Officers cannot be expected to deliver a comprehensive road-safety lesson every time they stop a driver.

Nor should education automatically replace enforcement. A driver who knowingly breaks the law may understand the risk perfectly well and simply choose to ignore it. In that situation, another explanation may accomplish little.

Education and enforcement have complementary purposes. Education helps people understand what they should do and why. Enforcement demonstrates that traffic laws are applied and violations have consequences.

Police must use judgment in deciding how to respond to individual circumstances. But they cannot be expected to educate every driver into making safe decisions, any more than they can enforce every traffic law against every offender.

The question is not whether police should educate or enforce. We need both, along with contributions from others who share responsibility for road safety.

Who Else Is Responsible?

Government and road-safety authorities establish traffic laws, set penalties and support enforcement and education programs. They should also evaluate whether those programs work. Counting tickets is straightforward; determining whether behaviour changes and collisions decrease requires a broader assessment.

Driver licensing and education help establish safe habits. Learning to drive is not simply a matter of passing a test. Drivers must continue to develop their knowledge and judgment as laws, vehicles and traffic conditions change. Education should explain not just what the rules are, but why they matter.

Road-safety organizations can reinforce these lessons. For example, ICBC's distracted-driving information helps explain the risks and offers drivers practical guidance. Public information can reach people before they encounter police enforcement and reinforce the message after a campaign ends.

Employers whose staff drive for work can set clear expectations about phone use, seatbelts and other safe practices. They should also avoid creating workplace pressures that encourage employees to answer messages while driving.

Parents, passengers and communities influence driving behaviour too. Parents help establish habits before young people obtain licences. Passengers can avoid distracting drivers and speak up when someone takes unnecessary risks. Communities can reinforce the expectation that dangerous driving is unacceptable.

These contributions may seem small compared with a police enforcement campaign, but they help make safe driving a shared expectation rather than simply a legal obligation.

Drivers themselves remain responsible for their choices. A driver cannot transfer that responsibility to police because enforcement is infrequent, to government because a law could be publicized more widely, or to an employer because a message seems urgent.

Putting a phone out of reach before starting the vehicle, wearing a seatbelt and allowing enough time for a trip are simple steps drivers can take without waiting for another campaign or reminder.

Education and Enforcement Must Work Together

No single approach will eliminate unsafe driving. Education can explain the risks and show drivers how to avoid them. Enforcement reinforces the importance of the rules by making clear that violations have consequences. Employers, families and communities can support safe choices in everyday life.

The September enforcement figures are a reminder that many drivers are still being caught using electronic devices while driving or failing to wear seatbelts. They are a reason to ask whether our combined efforts are doing enough, but they do not prove that education has failed or that enforcement is ineffective.

We should not measure success solely by how many violations police detect. We should ask whether drivers change their behaviour, whether safe habits become routine and whether fewer people are killed or injured on our roads.

Road Safety Is Everyone's Responsibility

Police have an important responsibility to enforce traffic laws fairly and consistently, and they can contribute to public education. But the responsibility for deterring unsafe driving extends well beyond them.

Government, licensing authorities, educators, road-safety organizations, employers, families and communities all have a part to play. Ultimately, however, each driver must accept responsibility for their own conduct.

The purpose of deterrence is not simply to catch drivers doing something wrong. It is to create a road environment in which people choose to do the right thing, even when nobody is watching.