Texting and driving is it good?
Debate Rounds (3)
2.Puts funds in auto repair shops making job opening and profit helping the economy
3.Puts fund in funeral home business as well
4.Brings money to auto dealerships
5. Keeps you updated on every little thing going on in your friends lives
these are some very good reasons to vote yes for texting and driving i don't see what the fuss is about. There is lots of reasons to text because who knows that text you didn't look at might be saying that your mom was just eaten by guerrillas...
NOW lets all e rational texting and driving is very helpful to our economy VOTE YES :)
Risk Increases of Cell Phone Tasks by Vehicle Type
Cell phone taskRisk of crash or near event crash
Light Vehicle Dialing2.8 times as high as nonR08;distracted driving
Light Vehicle Talking/Listening1.3 times as high as nonR08;distracted driving
Light Vehicle Reaching for object (i.e. electronic device...)1.4 times as high as nonR08;distracted driving
Heavy Vehicles/Trucks Dialing 5.9 times as high as nonR08;distracted driving
Heavy Vehicles/Trucks Talking/Listening1.0 times as high as nonR08;distracted driving
Heavy Vehicles/Trucks Use/Reach for electronic device6.7 times as high as nonR08;distracted driving
Heavy Vehicles/Trucks Text messaging23.2 times as high as nonR08;distracted driving
the above info clearly shows that using any device, specifically hand held devices reduce the ability of the driver to be able to focus on driving.
ShaunYap forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Both of you could really stand to check your grammar. Seriously, read over your posts just once before you post them, though Con has a slight edge ("eaten by guerillas"...seriously!?). Pro wins conduct because of the forfeit. No one wins sources because wiki is not a good source. Con wins arguments because, as far as I can tell, Pro never argues why it's more important to have the economic benefits than it is to have these lives persist. It's a strange argument in general, mainly because all of the economic benefits are tempered (if not removed completely) by the fact that these people are no longer a part of the workforce, are no longer able to help care for their families, and their deaths will likely cause psychological damage that will take still more people out of the workforce. The best you have is population control, which you never impact out or weigh within the debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.