Law making is akin to solving criminal puzzles. To paraphrase A. Loeb, the legislator must follow the evidence. The evidence includes empirical data, scientific research and especially the achievements of researchers. Following the above requires humility, which frees one from biases that can affect one’s observations and conclusions. Creating norms of penal law consists most of all of a systemic approach, so that this system is consistent and, most importantly, only at the end of proceedings punishes with an individual approach the offender whose guilt has been proven with all the guarantees afforded to the parties in the proceedings of a fair trial. Analysing the changes in the enacted amendment, the author focused on minor and juvenile offenders who also committed crimes, i.e. traffic accidents and, less frequently, traffic disasters or causing the immediate danger thereof. They were often an effect of extremely risky behaviour, aggression and even road rage. Should these perpetrators be punished for the consequences of these acts with all the tightened severity, as enacted by Parliament? A critical assessment of the change in punishment philosophy deserves consideration.