The Instigator
Harlan
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
DucoNihilum
Con (against)
Winning
39 Points

Owning a Hummer H2 is not justified.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/2/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,531 times Debate No: 2372
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (17)
Votes (16)

 

Harlan

Pro

I am fine if anyone wants to accept this debate, but it would be cool if I actually got to debate someone who owned a hummer. God knows there are plenty of people out there. Also, this will b very difficult if I am debating someone who does not believe in global warming, but I am perfectly willing to.

The quantity of large trucks that are only used to get around cities, and never see real usage in America is a problem, but in this debate I am focusing on the extreme of this tendency: the hummer.

All the time, I see super shiny Hummers driving around. Upon first glance, it is easy to determine that these trucks, most likely, are not regularly used for the serious work they are built for. I find this disgusting.

I truly hope not to offend anyone reading this by saying this, but it seems quite obvious to me that the real reason that most people (excluding the small minority that use their hummers well) purchase these trucks, are because they think they look cool. Strangely, we live in a society where people associate themselves personally with their automobile. They think of it as themselves. An inslt to their mode of transport is strangely a personal insult, taken at face value by the owner of the automobile.

This is why people buy trucks that they really need; why singles who don't have any kids or any immediate family to which he/she lives with, and hardly ever leave their nicely paved town own H2's.

The Hummer H2 is, of course, based on the Humvee, a military vehicle. People, like small children, think that Humvee's and the perceived glamour of war that they represent, are very neat, and purchase one and drive within their tiny activity space, with absolutely no need for it's power, exempt to boast about, and to feel a false boost of self-esteem when they can proudly dump tons of co2 into the air.

These people do not use this war machine for work, usually; it is merely used like a regular car, never exploiting its capabilities. It is used as a way to commute within a regular activity space….get to work….get to school…get the mail down the street.

The Hummer H2 has a weight over 8500 pounds, and so they are not required to meet the fuel efficiency level. ON top of that, they are not even required to release it's fuel economy. It has been estimated at around 10 miles per gallon. Based on General Motor's claim of 13 miles per gallon, ONE H2 will produce 3.4 tons of co2 in one year.

That is extremely bad for the environment. This machine dumps loads of gas into our atmosphere, and this, of course, has very negative effects.

Also, we are running out of oil. This is not a renewable resource. We are running out of oil, and it does not help when people use such a powerful and inefficient machine for transportation.

And finally, it is very dangerous to have a war machine on the road. This machine is built for war. That is simply how it is designed. OS when you implement this into a busy and crowded society it can be very dangerous.

To be fair, I believe this might have been an H1, but it is essentially the same deal:
DucoNihilum

Con

Hey Harlan, thanks for bringing up this interesting topic.

You argue that owning a hummer h2 is not justified. I have a problem with your premise. What is justification? Who must they 'justify' this to, the all powerful government? You? Isn't this their choice, not yours, and not the governments choice? You may speak of justification when you are buying something, or when something is being bought with your money, but not with somebody else's property.

Moving on.... I agree that most people who buy a H2 will buy it as a status symbol- but is that not what most cars are? You could buy a cheap 10,000 dollar car, but if you make enough money to buy an expensive car buying it is often used as a status symbol, or something to, as you say, 'look cool'. If 'looking cool' makes the hummer owner happy it has served its purpose entirely, with full justification. After all, they are spending their own money on this- so the only justification they need is their own. If they find spending an excessive amount of money to 'look cool' justified so be it. You have different tastes than others, you have the right to not by a H2 because you don't believe it makes you look cool, or you aren't interested in looking cool- but I find it distasteful and pretentious to criticize someone for simply fulfilling their wants with their own time, their own money, and their own labor. You repeat yourself alot for the next few paragraphs with a pretentious rant, so I will disregard that and move right on to fuel efficiency.

While the Hummer H2 may have somewhat low fuel efficiency, this is not something you should care about if it is not your own car. I am not going to attack you for refusing to buy leather seats, you should not attack a consumer for buying something inefficient. It is their money, and again, their choice to buy an inefficient vehicle.

You act as if buying a hummer is "obviously" going to have "Very negative effects" on the environment. That is simply untrue. CO2 is one, very small, contributor to the Global Warming Effect- humans produce an even smaller fraction of the CO2 exchanged in the atmosphere yearly, and a single person owning a single hummer H2 produces such a minimal effect it would be like dropping a grain of salt in the ocean and claiming you rose the salinity of the ocean by 'vast proportions'.

I wouldn't' necessarily say we are running out of oil any time in the very near future, but the market determines the prices of oil. Clearly, for those who purchase H2's, the extra money they have to pay for their gas is worth it. As oil becomes more scarce prices will rise, leading H2 owners to be less and less interested in H2's (Which is actually happening as we speak).

The H2 is not any more of a war machine than a jeep is a war machine. Just because a slightly similar vehicle is used in war does not make it a war machine. H2's are NOT built for war, HumVees are. Also, what is 'safe'? Are they 'safe' for the driver? Well, maybe more safe than a small car, less save than a semi truck. Are they 'safe' for other drivers? Well, less safe for small cars, more safe for semi trucks..... There are no especially 'safe' cars on the road when you consider the possibility of collisions will ALL vehicles.

In conclusion, if the consumer finds it to be justified- it is therefore justified to him, and that is all that matters. Consumers need not justify their purchases to the almighty government, nor to you.
Debate Round No. 1
Harlan

Pro

Harlan forfeited this round.
DucoNihilum

Con

My opponent argues that owning a certain vehicle she disapproves of is not justified. While it may not a justifiable purchase for her- there are many people in this market, for some, purchases like this are justified, some people will not find it justified.
Debate Round No. 2
Harlan

Pro

Harlan forfeited this round.
DucoNihilum

Con

Well this was disappointing. IT appears as if my opponent has conceded, either due to time constraints or perhaps he or she was convinced by my argument.

Regardless, as they have not posted in the last few rounds I take that as conceding, so I should win this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
Dangerous in what types of ways?
Posted by C-Mach 9 years ago
C-Mach
It depends on the situation, but in most cases, yes. Just to make myself clear, I am not making a contradiction here. I still wouldn't care if you owned a nuclear weapon.
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
I won't use it, but wouldn't tell you so if I was going to use it. In this hypothetical you can not be positive whether I will use it. Would you percieve that the chance that I would use it is dangerous?
Posted by C-Mach 9 years ago
C-Mach
Did you say you were going to use it? Yes or no?
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
Do you see the death of millions of people as something negative- something to prevent?
Posted by C-Mach 9 years ago
C-Mach
No, I do not. Damn you, 25 characters!!!
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
Thats a interesting question. sure, to some extent it is our right to own property.

Would you have any objections to me possesing a nuclear war-head?
Posted by C-Mach 9 years ago
C-Mach
Harlan, do you believe in the concept of private property? I don't think you do.
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
Busy, but I am not sure I would have been able to make a rebuttal even if I had been actively engaging in debate.org, as I often procrastinate a rebuttal because I know it will be difficult.
Posted by DucoNihilum 9 years ago
DucoNihilum
Where've you been, Harlan?
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by chevy10294 8 years ago
chevy10294
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Harlan 8 years ago
Harlan
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by kykrebs 8 years ago
kykrebs
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by RantingRob 9 years ago
RantingRob
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by kato0291 9 years ago
kato0291
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by EricW1001 9 years ago
EricW1001
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by griffinisright 9 years ago
griffinisright
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Vikuta 9 years ago
Vikuta
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
HarlanDucoNihilumTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03