The Instigator
20131159
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
Condor117
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Social networking sites should have age restrictions

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
20131159
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/8/2013 Category: Technology
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,549 times Debate No: 38653
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

20131159

Pro

Nowadays, there are a lot of social networking sites. People post information about themselves, communicate with other users, share their photos. Today, almost every child has account in one of the social networking sites. I believe that children should be able to enter those sites only at the age of 13 years old. Although, there are no age restrictions, in my opinion, social networks should be age-limited because of following reasons:

1. Nobody checks the information that people post in social networks every day. There are a lot of inappropriate things, language is often bad and vulgar, pictures sometimes can be provocative. Children under age restrictions might be affected by such things because their emotional system and understanding of the world are still unstable.

2. There is a problem of pedophiles. Unfortunately, there are people out there in the Internet who may use children's innocence. Children under age restrictions are not able to identify people who might be dangerous to communicate with. Pedophiles usually choose 11-12 years old children because it is easy to convince them and start a conversation.

3. Those sites often cause addiction. Risk of becoming dependent on social networking sites is even higher among children. They can't assess the situation of how dangerous using those networks might be. Social networks contain a lot of entertaining information. Therefore, children don't even notice how much time they spend on such sites.

4. There is a problem of cyberbullying. Children can't deal with this problem themselves. Bare mind children are not able to withstand the attacks in the Internet.

I think that social networking sites must have strict age limits.
Condor117

Con

There are age restrictions on most social networking sites. The problem is when asked their year of birth, they lie. It is very easy to bypass the system. When you come up with a better one, sell it to all the social networking sites and you'll be rich. On many of these sites like Instagram, you can report what people put our say. It's nothing to do with the sites. It's the people who got to take it into there own hands. What can a pedophile do through conversation? Message rape? I don't think so. And it's the 13 year olds that are probably the easiest to convince to meet in an alley or parking lot because they are more sexually interested. I'm in class right now so I have to end it here. I'm 14 but my profile shows 23. It's that easy to change your age.
Debate Round No. 1
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by fluffybunnypuff 3 years ago
fluffybunnypuff
Socialization and making friends is necessary for survival, people are interdependent. People choose social networks often because that is the best way available for them to get what they want, other methods of socialization might not be as practical or preferable for that individual.
"There is a problem of cyberbullying. Children can't deal with this problem themselves. Bare mind children are not able to withstand the attacks in the Internet." you are a complete disgusting liar that should be sterilized and banned from having children in your home unsupervised, and banned from raising or babysitting children.
Teach everyone that if someone is being mean ether tell them why their behavior is wrong and how they should correct it, or ignore them.
Teach people not to meet strangers alone in a parking lot because they might victimize you and that there is a lot of mean people in the world that lie and pretend to be nice so they can victimize you, then let them take the risk. Most people are smart enough not to meet strangers they met online in parking lots. very few people do. anyone who does is often desperate w/o better ways to socialize.
Posted by fluffybunnypuff 3 years ago
fluffybunnypuff
Freedom of speech protects people's right to chat and share photos on social networking sites at all ages. Many youngsters go on them to chat and share pictures with their relatives and friends.
Everyone should be advised never to share personal info, phone#, address, pictures/videos of yourself, name... on the internet because it can never be erased, and enemies or predators might use it to hunt you down. If they choose to take that risk let them.

Child=everyone is a child at all ages.

To say people under 12"s emotional system and understanding of the world are still unstable. Is completely prejudice, and a disgusting lie.
Pedophile=commonly =someone that wants to be sexual with people under 18, and its not illegal to want to.

Any attempt to make it illegal for youngsters to use online social networks, is no more than ether a way to keep cops distracted on something stupid so that real rapists, kidnappers" can get away with it easier, and/or an attempt to control the weak, and is only trying to legalize victimizing the weak by taking away their rights, while at the same time criminalizing freedom of speech and harmless activities.
Notice how you want to punish the potential victims, instead of punishing the pedophiles, obviously you have bad motives.
Don"t punish people just because there is a chance someone might victimize them, instead punish physical abusers and sexual assailants. there is to much serious crime being under punished, to ban freedom of speech.

Communication isn"t dangerous.
Its impossible for sites to cause addiction, liar. Addiction=you experience physical withdrawal symptoms(such as vomiting and flu like symptoms)after withdrawing from a physical substance often drugs.
There isn"t anything wrong with spending time on social networks. If you take away people"s ability to do activities that harm no 1, they will become mad, revengeful, and bored, often leading them to do whatever is available to do often including crime.
Posted by fluffybunnypuff 3 years ago
fluffybunnypuff
There should be no age limits for anything. Age doesn"t determine how wise, talented, skilled, smart, or physically able someone is. There are some 10year olds who graduated universities with their masters and run their own business that earns them more than enough to support them self and expand their business. There are multiple examples of people under 16 out competing older people for highly paid highly skilled jobs, such as building technology and machines.
k-12 and remedial college courses, are only to reward obedience, not smarts. It only teaches the student that gov school is a hypocritical partial totalitarian insane greedy dumb selfish sadist, and tries to teach the student that its ok to victimize someone if you can get away with it. It doesn"t teach the student anything it needs to know for life or a job. the student forgets the useless info after the test. Info coerced on victims is useless to the victim and incentives them to disobey the coercer in the future as punishment. People naturally want to learn what they need to know to be happy and healthy.
The winners of the Olympics often include 16year olds. 12year olds often make it to the Olympics. Some 12year olds are skilled at racing cars and car stunts (much better drivers than an adv 30-50 yr old licensed drivers). Some people under 10 are very strong and athletically talented, and better drivers than adv licensed driver.
Discriminating against someone based on age is no better than discriminating against someone based on race or gender. Age, gender, and race aren"t a choice, thus no 1 should be discriminated against based on it. People are discriminated against based on age often because small people are easier to control/move. Might doesn"t= right. Just because you are strong enough to control someone doesn"t give you the right to. Everyone has = human rights regardless of age. Self ownership.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Jakeross6 3 years ago
Jakeross6
20131159Condor117Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct was the same and neither provided sources. Pro had better spelling and grammar and organized his arguments the best. Con simply agreed with him but said they already have them.
Vote Placed by Weiler 3 years ago
Weiler
20131159Condor117Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: No sources. Cons only argument was a logical fallacy that since the rules are easy to break, there shouldn't be any.