The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
5 Points

Should drones be illegal in the USA

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/20/2015 Category: Economics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 550 times Debate No: 72050
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




I believe that drones should be illegal. Drones have caused a lot of distress to pilots and could one day be a great problem and could cost people their lives.


I want to start off by thanking the Pro for the debate.

Also, because there are only three rounds in this debate, I will go ahead and lay out my main points.

I will be arguing that drones should not be illegal, and here are my reasonings.

The definition of a "drone": "an unmanned aircraft or ship that can navigate autonomously,without human control or beyond line of sight:"[1]
This includes all drones, including UAVs (figure 1.) and camera drones (figure 2.)

Figure 1. UAV Reaper Drone [2]

Figure 2. Camera Drone. [3]

Because the Pro does not specify which drones, I will argue for them all.

Despite what Pro states in his opening thesis, drones can actually be extremely beneficial in many ways.

1: Drones aide in saving lives. Immediately after natural disasters in which the damage is not yet determined, drones can be used to easily assess the amount of damage and find out the level of danger, and acts as a safe alternative to sending in first responders.

2: Drones help in agricultural management. Farmers can use drones specifically to manage crops and pinponts areas that need special attention. This way saves time by only providing care exactly where needed, and improves crop yield.

3: Help safely in architechtural maintenance and inspection. Drones can obviously go places where humans cannot, and can also do it without risking lives. For example, drones would easily help inspect places of infrastructure such as below bridges and high buildings.

4: Drones give the media access to places: They can film places never reached before, for news and film production. This can be done easily, efficiently, and safely, thanks to drones.

Because of my limited time, I will limit my arguments to those above and wait for the Pro to present his. I look forward to this debate and the rebuttals along with it.


Debate Round No. 1


while I do agree with some of your points, people flying these drones could and have caused major problems. Personally I would be freaked out if a drone hit a plane I was on and the pilot had to turn it around because the engine was failing or if the plane fell. Planes carry dozens of people and it would be a serious tragedy if all of them (or most) had lost their lives to some guys joyriding their toy drone for amusement.


The Pro repeatedly mentions the fact that he/she fears the idea of a drone/plane collision, and bases their arguments on that.

This fear is not illogical. Plane/drone collisions are possible (though not frequent, if existent), and have lately come closer to colliding than other times. [1]

However, the Pro argues that drone should be completely and utterly illegal, which I strongly disagree with. The FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) sets rules and regulations as to who and what are allowed in the big blue sky; and they are seemingly coming closer to an agreement on approving drones above. [2]

As the Con, I am arguing that drones should not be illegal in the USA, but rather that the FAA aproves drone use with the given rules and regulations. I do believe there are limits to what drones should be able to do, however, they are generally beneficial and should not be outlawed in this country.


Debate Round No. 2


MayatheHairGreaser forfeited this round.


CentristX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by CentristX 1 year ago
Pro forfeits. Vote Con.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by kman100 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con pointed out the holes in Pro's arguments. Pro didn't effectively respond to most of Cons points, and attempted to discuss the issue instead of debating it,