The Instigator
Glennj
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
dtaylor971
Con (against)
Winning
27 Points

Should 14 year olds be able to drive?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+7
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 5 votes the winner is...
dtaylor971
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,893 times Debate No: 41785
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

Glennj

Pro

Hello, My name is Glenn and I am doing a research paper/debate paper on the topic "Should 14 year olds be able to drive?" I happen to agree on this topic. I believe 14 year olds should be able to get around on their own without having to depend on the bus and or others such as parents, to get around. 14 year old are more busy with school or extra curricular activities. Some parents aren't capable of getting their kids to school on their own. 14 year olds should be able to make it to school on time. Some may say that 14 year olds are too young to drive because of immaturity and the danger they can cause on the road, but, the real problem is the old folks who honestly don't even need to be out driving... older folks have nothing to do and always endanger everyone else along with them selves while in a car accident. Average 14 year old have basic cognitive skills such as paying attention, memorization, processing information, and being able to perform academically. Teens aren't stupid they can obviously see how big the responsibility driving is, and if Teens can't drive then old folks shouldn't be able to drive either... Lets 14 year olds drive?

p.s. I'm 14 and yes, I know how to drive
dtaylor971

Con

Thanks to pro for providing such a wonderful topic. Honestly, I was a little surprised by this topic. But I will be debating on behalf of the side, "driving age should be raised or stay the same."

"I believe 14 year olds should be able to get around on their own without having to depend on the bus and or others such as parents, to get around."
And they can. They can walk, run, or bike to school. I remember my childhood school was 1.5 miles away, and I ran to school a lot. I was 12 at the time. If a 12 year old can run to school, so can a 14-year old. There should also be safer ways to get around than driving. Also, what is so wrong about the bus? Beside it smelling terrible, it is a good, useful, and popular way of getting around. 14 year olds should not have the privilege of driving to get around, as I will later state in my arguments.

"Some parents aren't capable of getting their kids to school on their own."
If they don't have the time to get their own kid to school, then they must have a very demanding workload. If they require that much work, then how would they even be able to afford a car? They would be able to afford the bus. Even if you don't like the bus, it is still useful if you don't have the time.

"14 year olds should be able to make it to school on time."
I believe that many 14-year olds are smart enough to figure out how to get to school without being late, or without the use of a car. Most of them know algebra, so they should be able to do the math of how to get to school on time, don't you think?

"The real problem is the old folks who honestly don't even need to be out driving... older folks have nothing to do and always endanger everyone else along with them selves while in a car accident."
That is a whole different debate. Also, I beg to differ. 16 year-olds get into accidents 64 times out of 1,000 [1]. The rest of the community? Just 16.8 per all ages. That is a biased statement and is an opinion. This is based on facts, not what you think about old people.

"Average 14 year old have basic cognitive skills such as paying attention, memorization, processing information, and being able to perform academically."
In school, that is. As I pointed out earlier, the chances of a more developed 16-year old driver gets into an accident 64 out of 1000 people. A 14 year old is less developed and may be more overwhelmed with everyday activities, thus leading to not paying attention. And that leads to accidents. If you have a panic attack if you forgot your homework on the road, you crash. End of story.

"Teens aren't stupid they can obviously see how big the responsibility driving is, and if Teens can't drive then old folks shouldn't be able to drive either."
As I also stated, old people is a different debate. You can see how big of a responsibility driving is, but how do you know other kids can? At 14 years old, some 8TH GRADERS would be able to drive. Someone who hasn't even touched high school on the road. And also, you said teens. I thought we were only debating on 14-year olds.

On to my arguments!

To start the section of my arguments, I will turn to car accidents. We all know they are happening right now, somewhere. But what I think we did not know is that 282,000 teens were injured in car accidents, and 2,700 were killed [2]. If we were to let 14 and 15 year olds drive, car crashes would go up for two reasons. One being that there are more cars on the road, and two is that with even the more smart and intelligent 16-19 year olds on the roads crashing at an alarming rate, think about what a 14 year old would do. That's a ton more accidents and more deaths.

You stated that teenagers should have cars to be able to manage their after-school activities, but who is to say that they wouldn't do more than that? They'd probably go on a joy ride regardless of what anyone tells them. Having a car at a young age is cool, right? A boy may take a few girls out on the highway and be distracted, or vice versa. We know that happens with 16-year olds. A lesser thing is that children may skip school and spend the day far away due to the fact that they can get around so easily. You have to face it, some 14-year olds are just downright irresponsible.

My last argument is that this is far too big of a step for us to take. We would get greedy. Right now, there are numerous debates going on about why the driving age should be raised or stay the same, let alone lowered. More children and adults, even, would get greedy if this was passed. Please note that the debate we are talking about it not just in theory, but what would actually happen if this was passed. In order to make this change, people will have to show that they're responsible. That hasn't worked out. So the bottom line is: If 16-year olds are that irresponsible on the road, imagine what a 14-year old would be like on the road. Also, another bottom line is that we would get greedy with laws.

On to you and your arguments!

[1] http://www.dmv.ca.gov...#
[2] http://www.cdc.gov...








Debate Round No. 1
Glennj

Pro

okay, First off. No one likes to take the bus, we would all rather want to be driven someplace. Second no one likes to walk/bike to places when they need to be there for certain reasons. I wouldn't want to get to school or anyplace matter of fact all sweaty. I get plenty of exercise during P.E. class... so don't pull any exercise points on me. Yes the bus is a convenient way to get places.... and YES the bus can be dangerous. I have to take the bus to school and back home every day; waking up in the morning just to make the bus on time and most days being tardy for school... traffic traffic traffic, we can't fix that. I can sit in the bus and point out many people who are crazy talking to them selves. #notsafe #GTFO Exactly... "Most of them know algebra, so they should be able to do the math of how to get to school on time, don't you think?" you said this. I am perfectly capable of getting to school on time, but, its not always up to me or my fault when I'm late. I'm not an idiot. "16 year-olds get into accidents 64 times out of 1,000' you said this. 77 percent of all male drivers cause accidents. Way more then girls... doesn't that mean male drivers shouldn't be able to drive? no of course not. Oh! and cognitive skills aren't just for school. you can look that up yourself... And I stated that if 14 year olds were READY they should be able to drive. that doesn't mean the are going to be forced to drive. READY means READY. Driving comes from experience not age difference. Yes a 14 year old is a teen my friend... "But what I think we did not know is that 282,000 teens were injured in car accidents, and 2,700 were killed" you said this. What your study didn't show was how much teens were driving and how much other people were killed when in the accident. It doesn't show who's fault it was and why the crash occurred. "You have to face it, some 14-year olds are just downright irresponsible" you said this... Yes I have faced that fact. but again, READY means READY.
dtaylor971

Con

Well that was kind of rude. Guess you be rude, I'll be rude.

"okay, First off. No one likes to take the bus, we would all rather want to be driven someplace."
Okay, first off, why should someone be able to drive when they can't do something as simple as capitalize the beginning of the sentence? Also, you showed a huge contradiction in that. The bus does drive you someplace. And how do you know that no one likes the bus? Even if you don't, you need to accept it. Not everything in life you have to like. Sure, driving is fun. But it is very dangerous, and you need to wait until you are mature and ready.

"Second no one likes to walk/bike to places when they need to be there for certain reasons. "
Are you serious? My friends and I ran, walked, biked, jogged, and even scootered to school! And hell, we enjoyed it! Maybe you don't like it, but other people do. It isn't about exercise for me. Sure, I like exercise, but I bike so I can have fun.

"I wouldn't want to get to school or anyplace matter of fact all sweaty."
Once again, that is your opinion. Maybe some people like to get places all sweaty from exercise to show a hard job done. I feel like this argument is all about what you like and don't like, not what is best for the community. All three of my rebuttals so far have argued reasons that were either opinions or biased.

"Yes the bus is a convenient way to get places.... and YES the bus can be dangerous."
That is the STUPIDEST thing I have ever heard. Do you know how many car crashes there are compared to buses?! About 371,000 in a decade (cars) [1]. For school buses? About... 1,245. That's about 0.35% chance of getting in a bus crash rather than a car crash. Check your facts.

"I can sit in the bus and point out many people who are crazy talking to themselves."
Here's another problem you don't know how to fix. IGNORE THEM. Look out the window. Also, this is only your school bus. Not everyone's. Another personal fact.

"I'm not an idiot."
I never said you were.

"16 year-olds get into accidents 64 times out of 1,000' you said this. 77 percent of all male drivers cause accidents. Way more then girls... doesn't that mean male drivers shouldn't be able to drive? no of course not."
Gender stereotypes. Where's your link so I can prove this fact? That's the same as saying this: Old people get into accidents 20% of the time. Therefore, they should be not able to drive. Which YOU think. You just crossed out your own argument. Also, we don't have any statistics on 14 year old drivers, so how should we know?

"And I stated that if 14 year olds were READY they should be able to drive."
That's not what the title says. I'm debating that 14 year olds should not be able to drive. That doesn't matter once the title has been stated. Also, you fail many times when you are ready. And those fails lead to car crashes. And those car crashes lead to deaths.

"What your study didn't show was how much teens were driving and how much other people were killed when in the accident."
Yes it did. It showed teens at the wheel. The graph stated how many teens cause the accident at the wheel. It also specifically stated how many TEENS were killed at the wheel. Did you even take a look at my link? Also, not much. It's supposed to be many. How do I know that you are able to drive when you can't even follow your grammar notebook?

"READY means READY."
No, it actually might not. Many 16-year olds are deemed ready to drive, and some freak out after testing and get into accidents. And I doubt that you are really ready. 14 year-olds should be focusing on getting into high school, not how to drive. Even if you are ready, many 14-year olds are not. Yet if this law would pass, they would be able to drive. That said, many people who aren't ready can get on the road. Again, we are debating what the title says, and that means all 14 year olds. You can't base your argument only on ready means ready. Also, organize your arguments and my quotes. I can't tell anything in there!

Since this is the second round, I will not post any arguments. I will in the third. I want to give my opponent more chances to provide me loopholes that I can turn into arguments.

Thank you very much for reading!


[1] http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov...



Debate Round No. 2
Glennj

Pro

Glennj forfeited this round.
dtaylor971

Con

My opponent has forfeitted this round so I have nothing to post.

Extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
Glennj

Pro

Glennj forfeited this round.
dtaylor971

Con

All arguments extended.
Debate Round No. 4
Glennj

Pro

Glennj forfeited this round.
dtaylor971

Con

Another almost-full forfeit. *Sigh...*




Vote con.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
The statistics show that elderly people have much lower accident rates than teens, even though the teens have better vision and reflexes. The reason is that human brain development is such that young people do not relate actions to consequences. Young people don't see the downside of taking risks. The brain mechanism for assessing consequences does not fully develop until about age 25. Debaters on this and similar topics should google the research on the subject. Old people have fewer accidents because they worry a lot more about the consequences and avoid hazardous situations.

It seems to me that emotional maturity could be tested in a simulator. That might give young people showing good risk aversion a way to get a license. On the other hand, before that happens we'll probably have self-driving cars.
Posted by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
Pro doesn't defend that 14 year olds are capable of driving. Only that elderly people shouldn't either. He keeps saying they are ready, yet already conceded to the point that they are immature...
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
Glennjdtaylor971Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Easy win for con based upon citing the accident statistics, a reliable source. Pro forfeited, losing conduct.
Vote Placed by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
Glennjdtaylor971Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were so superior, that Pro left the site. ;-) JK. Good debate, up until the forfeit though.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Glennjdtaylor971Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: CONDUCT: FF. ARGUMENT: Pro gave about the weakest ever, including dumb absolute statements like "no one likes to take the bus," which an 11 year old could have shot holes in. Con very effectively, and with good organization tore it to pieces.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Glennjdtaylor971Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made arguments based on personal feelings with no rational basis, and reverted to name calling and childish behavior in the debate. As such arguments and conduct go to Con for thought out arguments and good conduct by not forfeiting. Con also gets awarded grammar points and source points.
Vote Placed by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
Glennjdtaylor971Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, But con had won his debate by round 2.