The Instigator
MaxLascombe
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
TheDarkMuffin
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Everything at 18 (driving, drinking, voting, etc.)

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/28/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,001 times Debate No: 34276
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

MaxLascombe

Pro

Hi. In my country, this has already been adopted. But I learned a few years back already that the US had different ages for each thing. I found this bizarre and when I thought about it today I wanted to start a debate about it.

I am glad to be debating this with someone and hope to learn some things...
TheDarkMuffin

Con

I, as Con, accept this challenge to argue in favor of a different legal age for most things that are deemed necessary to legislate and enforce legal age upon.

If that's incorrect, please correct me in the comments or your next round.

Being that there are five rounds, I'll simply use this one for acceptance.

Good luck!
Debate Round No. 1
MaxLascombe

Pro

I will start by saying that my opponent has understood the position he is taking in this debate.
I have many reasons for being for this resolution:

1. Everything at 18 is easier. Having different ages for each each thing where it is necessary to enforce a legal age limit on (driving at 16 and a half, voting at 18, drinking at 21) is a very complicated system. It becomes very difficult to have different ages to remember, even considering these sometimes change as you change region. This is why I believe we should have only one age for all things needing a certain age limit.

2. Why 18? 18 is the age where we become an adult, where we are supposed to have our own responsibilities, etc. So why only give these eighteen-year-olds the right to vote. In my country, as I have already said, we have already adopted this idea, making becoming an adult a big thing. When you get all the things at once, you truly understand responsibility, as you feel the country accepts you as a responsible adult. In the Us, it's like, 'You are now responsible and mature, but let's not go to far, am I right?!'

This is all I wish to say for this round.
TheDarkMuffin

Con

First, allow my argument to derive from my opponent's a bit. As in, I'll rebut for my argument.

A Lesson from Dredd: The Meaning of the Law

"Everything at 18 is easier. Having different ages for each each thing where it is necessary to enforce a legal age limit on (driving at 16 and a half, voting at 18, drinking at 21) is a very complicated system."

Unfortunately, notwithstanding what you may have believed hitherto: The law is not there as a means of having a simple system. If you want a system that's more simple, simply don't have a system at all. If there's no law system, then my side would still be correct, as the limit isn't 18. It's simply nonexistent.

The law is there as a means of legislating what to enforce to enforce the security of our lives. If that means limiting different things at different ages, then so be it. We develop different abilities at different times. If puberty and whatnot all happened at once, and our brain completely changed its shape in a split second, becoming fully developed, I'm certain something undesirable would happen.

Like Death.

Why We Need Different Ages

So, we develop at different times for different things. It only makes sense to only give what's been developed at the age it's developed, instead of giving everything.

I believe this is how you imagine it.

"Mr. President! Drinking age is 18. That's just like everything else!"
"What!? Man, we need to be more wonky and stuff. MAKE ALL THE AGES DIFFERENT! MAKE DRINKING AGE 21!"

Here's the truth.

"Mr. President, studies show that the brain takes significantly more damage to inhibition at the age of 18 in opposition to 21.[1]"
"Very well. I don't know why you're telling me this, since only the States can decide that kinda stuff."
"Just thought it was a fun fact. I released the study."
"Great. Man, I sure am glad that whole Communism thing blew over."

[All the States later changed the Drinking Age to 21.]

They research this sh*t. They don't just get up one day and go "LET'S MAKE THINGS CRAZIER!"

Also, if you're going to argue that we should make the age 21 for everything, that's still not your argument based on your thesis. It's also a pain in the a*s to wait until 21 for everything.

Finally...

OMFG EMOTIONS IM SO BORED SO CHANGE THE LAW

"When you get all the things at once...you feel the country accepts you...In the Us, it's like, 'You are now responsible and mature, but let's not go to far, am I right?!'"

Wow.

"Mr. President!"
"Wh-!? How did this kid-how the hell did you get into my House!?"
"I want you to change the law so I can feel accepted by the country!"
"Kid, you've got some serious problems."
"LOVE ME."
"I don't even...make the laws...do you pay attention in class?"
"Not really."
"Yeah, me neither. Wanna go get a drink?"
"No, I can't."
"OH! Yeah. Right. Haha! Ha. Loser."

Yeah, I don't think you have a sufficient understanding of our government over here, Pro.



      1. http://report.nih.gov...
Debate Round No. 2
MaxLascombe

Pro

I will take the same structure of response as my oppositon.

"If you want a system that's more simple, simply don't have a system at all."

You say that this is not made to be simple but you are just making this debate easier by saying things I haven't said. I never said that I wanted to erase the system altogether. I said I wanted to make it simpler. You say that if this is what I want, well let's do away with the system all together! But I think you forgot that this system is made to be understood by people like you and me, of diverse intelligence and knowledge of American politics. So I believe making it more simple is not a bad thing at all.

"If puberty and whatnot all happened at once, and our brain completely changed its shape in a split second, becoming fully developed, I'm certain something undesirable would happen."

Now, I know that when someone becomes an adult at 18. There are no drastic physical changes that happen to their body or brain. But what is the use of saying you become an adult at 18 if all you get for it is the possibility of voting? In most countries, where verything is at 18, you say that you become an adult because that means you get all of those new rights. But in the US? What is the use of 'becoming an adult'?

"They research this sh*t. They don't just get up one day and go "LET'S MAKE THINGS CRAZIER!""

Everyone know things like alcohol effects on the brain are researched, that's not the point. Although you may say that we should not allow drinking at 18 because it damages the brain MORE than at 21, we all know that this rule is almost in everyone's life broken at least once.ANd if it causes damage, why not make the age even more than 21? or even abolish the consumption of alcohol all together? Because poeple would still not respect the rule anyway.

"Yeah, I don't think you have a sufficient understanding of our government over here, Pro."

It may be true I do not have as much understanding of it as you, CON, but I believe you shouldn't once again invent things I say. The dialogue you added before this line was completely made up, and nothing in it was something I said. You may think it is funny to make up things the opposition has said so you can feel better about yourself, but I do not. I know that the president does not make up the laws, and this has nothing to do with wether or not I paid attention in class. I would like you to give a bit more respect to me, as this is a legitimate debate.

That's all for this round.

TheDarkMuffin

Con

Upon re-reading my previous round, I couldn't help but feel like I came off as incredibly rude and pretentious and I apologize profusely. Deduct conduct points as necessary. However, I will still rebut your argument points, with a newfound clarity now.

"...I think you forgot that this system is made to be understood by people..."

This is true. The law must be understood. However, this brings me back to my other point, which I believe you drastically misinterpreted. I wasn't putting words in your mouth. I was making a point.

The law isn't just meant to be understood and simple. It's also meant to regulate behavior to keep people safe. So, obviously, we would only make it simpler to the most convenient, yet still safe, limit. I could argue that it'd be easier to understand the law if no laws were made. There's nothing much to know because there's nothing at all.

However, even then, you'd be contradicting your argument of 18 being the age, because the age limit would really be nonexistent. So, your argument should really be why 18 is the safest age.

"...you say that you become an adult because that means you get all of those new rights. But in the US? What is the use of 'becoming an adult'?"

I'm not entirely sure what you meant by this point. You didn't really give any definite value for a sufficient amount of rights, so I evaluated it off of my own perception, and I believe we acquire a fluous amount of rights at the age of 18. To list a few, you get to:
  • Vote
  • Form a Will
  • Sign an official contract independently in your own name
  • Donate Organs
  • Be Independent from Parental Control
  • Get a Legal Attorney

...and more![1]

I'm curious as to how many rights you get at 18, as I'd like to discern a ratio and see if it's as unreasonable and ridiculous as you claim it to be.


"Everyone know things like alcohol effects on the brain are researched, that's not the point. Although you may say that we should not allow drinking at 18 because it damages the brain MORE than at 21, we all know that this rule is almost in everyone's life broken at least once."

I must say, this rebuttal left a taste of...confusion, and quite possibly discombobulation, in my brain. It seems poorly formed, so I'll let you develop more on it the following round, but I'll rebut it anyways. You're saying that we shouldn't put it at 21 because people don't respect the law.

...But if we put it at 18, people will!? Pardon me for any inaccuracy, but it seems to me that this is your logic:

  1. If it is a written law or regulation, people will not respect it.
  2. We need some way to restrict the right of drinking to those 18 or above.
  3. It ought to be done that there is a written law against people drinking below the age of 18 years.

To simplify:

  1. If A, no C.
  2. C.
  3. We should have A for C.

Upon seeing this, I had some sort of intrinsic, unconscious inclination to be reminded of this.[2] If A and C cannot possibly satisfy each other, why are you saying we should have A to satisfy C in complete contradiction of this!?

"I know that the president does not make up the laws, and this has nothing to do with wether or not I paid attention in class."

I apologize. However, in your thesis, you said "that the US had different ages for each thing." This implied that you thought these rules were at national/federal level. I simply made a reasonable presumption.

Again, I apologize for coming off so rudely. This isn't an excuse, it's just an explanation, I was having a bad day as we all do, but I shouldn't have let my emotions spill onto an objective debate. I'll send you cookies. Wait, you're in another country. That could be expensive. Never mind.

  1. http://opi.mt.gov...
  2. http://youtu.be...
Debate Round No. 3
MaxLascombe

Pro

MaxLascombe forfeited this round.
TheDarkMuffin

Con

With only one more round remaining, I hope my opponent occupies it appropriately.
Debate Round No. 4
MaxLascombe

Pro

MaxLascombe forfeited this round.
TheDarkMuffin

Con

Fair enough. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.