Driving Age Should Be Lowered to 14
Debate Rounds (4)
They also cannot work until the legal age of 16, so why have it as low as 14? They would be unable to afford the lessons and test, let alone the car itself, the tax, the insurance, etc. If someone at 14 years of age wants to go somewhere without bothering their parents or guardians for lifts, that is what public transport is for.
And that automatically means that people should be allowed to work or drive at that age? Legally, you can only officially work once you receive your National Insurance Number or Social Security Number, which can only be received at the age of 16. Anyone working at a younger age, that is up to the employer who is willing to hire them, but most won't, simply because the majority of teenagers at that age are not responsible enough to hold a full time job. Nor are they responsible enough to drive safely on the road.
Again, that is what public transport is for. If they don't want to bother anyone for lifts, they can just as easily take the bus or train to where they need to go and it would cost a lot less money than upkeeping a car. Most people need a full time job to be able to afford a car, and with 14 year olds still being in school, they wouldn't be able to work enough to afford it, especially since the younger you are, the less salary you earn.
And at such a young age, why would they require to go such a distance for work, that they'd require a car? Every town has a load of shops and companies that require work. Ok, a lot won't hire someone that young, but that's not going to be any different in any other town or city. They aren't qualified, they aren't always responsible and they require more training and supervision than any other employee would. You also don't have to know how to drive, in order to be committed to a job. I know plenty of people who work full time and don't own cars, they either walk it, bus it or take a taxi, and they're all over the legal age to work and drive. And if they can do it, so can 14 year old's.
Public transport will always take you most of the way. When I go to work on the train, I walk the rest of the way. It's never far for someone to get to work from a public transport stop and to say otherwise is making excuses. If they really didn't want to bother anyone for lifts, they'd accept the means that's available and affordable to them, which is public transport and walking the rest of the way. It won't kill them, and in fact, would get them some fresh air and exercise, which a lot of kids don't get, these days.
Also minors can't work late shifts, by law. All public transport runs until at least midnight in most countries. I know I've gotten a train to get home from work after my late shifts, so they're insured to get a bus or train. And if not, taxis run 24 hours a day and it'd still be cheaper than keeping up a car. But again, none of this would concern minors, because they have to work day hours.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: pro had the BOP and did very little to support her/his resolution. I'd like to see a lot more effort and care in creating arguments from both sides.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.