The Instigator
SnowPies
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
durrrr013
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Should drivers education be free for every high school student?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 1 vote the winner is...
durrrr013
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/27/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 605 times Debate No: 70795
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

SnowPies

Pro

According to the Center for Disease Control, 292,000 teenagers have been injured or killed by car accidents. Many of those were because of uneducated, inexperienced drivers. Allowing free drivers education would give accessibility and time to learn how to drive safely. Free drivers education is important because many families can"t afford a 400 dollar education class. With a proper education for driving, there would be less accidents.
durrrr013

Con

I completely agree with the pro side that educating drivers makes them safer as well as everyone else on the roadways. I believe a vote for Con is warranted due to the wording of the topic: "Free for all students". No matter the details of how this program works it will cost SOMEBODY (presumably taxpayers) money. The second reason for a Con vote is that giving items are seldom taken as seriously as those that are earned. Teenagers are likely to take a free Driver's ed about as seriously as they do high school in general.
Debate Round No. 1
SnowPies

Pro

SnowPies forfeited this round.
durrrr013

Con

Without new arguments to go on, I will supplement my prior arguments.

Pro points out that many families might not be able to afford the classes. I would counter that driving is a PRIVLEDGE, and an expensive one at that (car, insurance, registration, gas). If one can't afford this, perhaps they should consider a more cost-effective transportation alternative. It's important that those on the road are serious about driving safely.

I will wait for my opponents response.
Debate Round No. 2
SnowPies

Pro

EXCUSSEEE MEEEEEE.. Not a privilege. Most highschool students end up getting a low job. Nothing very educational but simple to help pay for bills. Having free drivers educational class at the highschool gives them more room to be able to get their license. To get to work, safely and back home safely. Although you could argue a ton, having a license is something most high school people could use for getting to school, and for getting to work. With the 4 years of you being in highschool, this gives you more room to practice driving.
durrrr013

Con

Driving is absolutely a privilege. There is no constitutional amendment stating "your right to operate a motor vehicle shall not be infringed". It is by definition a privilege.

I would again like to point out that I do agree that driver's ed is a benefit to society.

While my opponent has yet to respond to my criticisms, I will further expand on my points.

Providing free driver's ed to every high school student aged 16-18 would be a very costly project. There are very few highschools that could facilitate this as part of their curriculum (not having a driving instructor, no cars, not being insured for training drivers). What would end up happening is the government would pay large sums to private driving schools. There would be little if any cost savings. This money would come out of the public pool of cash, either leading to tax increases or reduction in other services.

If the service is free, most that are eligible will enroll because there is no cost. This low investment is going to lead to many not taking it seriously, and when combined with the general apathy of your avergae teenager, it will end up being a waste of taxpayer money.

Driving demands personal responsibility. YOU have to make sure your car is operational. YOU have to have insurance. YOU have to drive safely. Requiring prospective drivers to front there own costs will fit with this paradigm of personal responsibility.
Debate Round No. 3
SnowPies

Pro

"Providing free driver's ed to every high school student aged 16-18 would be a very costly project. There are very few highschools that could facilitate this as part of their curriculum (not having a driving instructor, no cars, not being insured for training drivers). What would end up happening is the government would pay large sums to private driving schools. There would be little if any cost savings. This money would come out of the public pool of cash, either leading to tax increases or reduction in other services."
|
-- Although I do see your point in this argument. Like myself, I want to get a license and get a job be more individualized. But I cannot pay some 499$ fee to a schooling class that teaches me about Drivers ed. Previously my mom had a seizure at 60MPH driving down IFive in Everett Washington. I pulled the car over, with no scratches or anything. I had no drivers experience. But before I go on the road again, I want to be able to have the proper education. A ton of highschool students that really have low wealth, really need to get jobs. Riding the city bus, is out of the question and extremely unsafe.

"If the service is free, most that are eligible will enroll because there is no cost. This low investment is going to lead to many not taking it seriously, and when combined with the general apathy of your avergae teenager, it will end up being a waste of taxpayer money."
|
-- Although I do see you're point in this. This is more directed to you assuming that they can just take the class to get their license. Before taking the class I would assume there would be a exam, just making sure that you would be taking this seriously. Each class would have strict teachers who wouldn't allow students to be able to mess around in the class, or they are removed from the class. This would make the people who take this class want to more serious about getting their drivers license. If this class is free, does not mean that they can just mess around in the class. Obviously if there is a class you have had that let you mess around in the class, and not take seriously. That is all directed towards the teacher. Not the idea that students wouldn't take this seriously.

Driving demands personal responsibility. YOU have to make sure your car is operational. YOU have to have insurance. YOU have to drive safely. Requiring prospective drivers to front there own costs will fit with this paradigm of personal responsibility.
|
-- Your arguments state opinions and a bit of facts. In my opening argument I listed that most high school students with a license would probably be getting the license around getting a job. I insure there may be some kids that may not have insurance helping the road stay clear of irresponsible drivers. But once again, if drivers who don't have insurance are driving around freely on the road. The cops aren't doing their job.
~ obliterated
durrrr013

Con

"Riding the city bus, is out of the question and extremely unsafe."

--I'm going to have to call you out on this point. Millions of people around the world use public transit for their commute with no problems. I've even ridden a bike several miles to a job.

As for needing a car for a commute, once again you would also NEED a car first, and that dwarfs the cost of the education. It sounds like YOU could benefit from driver's ed and that you assume every other high school student is in a similiar boat. There are plenty of kids with jobs who make do without vehicles.

Every time I try to read your other counterpoints, I get a bit of a headache. You should try giving your post a once-over before hitting submit.

"~obliterated"

--lolz
Debate Round No. 4
SnowPies

Pro

SnowPies forfeited this round.
durrrr013

Con

tl;dr: There are too many nuances in this proposal for a major government program to be appropriate.

I would like to thank my opponent for participating and contributing ideas to this debate.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jupiter1 2 years ago
Jupiter1
SnowPiesdurrrr013Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro- dropped 2 rounds. Con- lacked any evidence, and was right in proving that it would cost somebody to make it free.