The Instigator
Pro (for)
14 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Children should have mobile phones

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 1/8/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 724 times Debate No: 67986
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)




they should


First of all, you did not explain anything at all about the debate, and I will ask for punctiation and above average grammar.
As you don't say anything about the debate i am eager know if this round is acceptance.
In your next post please explain the age of what you call children and other details.
Debate Round No. 1


Mobile phones helps children stay in contact with their parents

Mobile phones help children have an emergency way to contact people in cases of emergencies

Mobile phones reduce kidnappings

child - a young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority.


CainAbel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


First of all i have not been able to reply previous entries but i will try to debate previous points.

"Mobile phones helps children to stay in contact with their parents"
I hope that reduces epidemic obesity, aggression, addiction, strong emission of radiation, sleep deprivation and digital dementia.
But yeah i guess you've got a point in there.

"Mobile phones help children have an emergency way to contact people in cases of emergencies"
Kids usually use their mobile phones to prank and/or call 911 for weird and foolish reasons.
One thing in special, "swatting" became trendy lately and consists of calling 911 to call a swat team to another child house to ruin the game session of said child.
Makenna Sewell called 911 to kill a 2-inch spider, clearly not an emergency.
10-year-old Dan David called because he did not wanted to sleep, sounds like a emergency doesn't it?
The list goes on and on.

"Mobile phones reduce kidnappings"
They may reduce kidnappings or may not reduce kidnappings im not sure, and can't really tell hence your lack of sources but cell phones do increase general crime and tragedy.
Street road accidents because of children using the cellphone while walking on the street.
Stealing of wealthy cellphones that if the children resists usually end in murder or violence.
Identity thefts also.

What about false kidnappings?
In Spain some false kidnappers ask children their phone numbers, name and details before a movie and proceed to call their parents for money from their devices to simulate a kidnappings and ask for huge amounts of money, this problem has grown a lot lately not only in Spain but America as well.

A point i will also encourage the voters to investigate (Im almost out of characters):

Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by CainAbel 2 years ago
Too late, my friend.
Posted by Lexus 2 years ago
I will accept when I get to a computer
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by YYW 2 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: CON cannot introduce new arguments in the final round and expect them to benefit him in judgement, especially after he forfeited a round.
Vote Placed by Lexus 2 years ago
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: While I don't really like the FF, that alone is not enough to give pro the win. Con successfully refuted pro's points, by saying that mobile phones don't really help in kidnappings (and are often abused in the name of kidnappings), among other very valid points. I did not like this debate at all, it was mostly just fluff and not even debate, but I ought to give the winner of the debate their points.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: FF, all arguments made last round giving PRO no chance to respond. Highly immoral way to conduct a debate, so I must throw out the new arguments last round. Kinda a crappy debate, but whatever, pro wins based on that criteria