The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Texting and driving is it good?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 1/11/2014 Category: Cars
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 961 times Debate No: 43742
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




Ok, why on earth would you think texting and driving is good you ask? simple i will give you 5 reasons
1.Population Control
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...


I'm sorry Sir/Madam but I do not see eye to eye with you on this matter. What you have just stated is that the economy and money is more important than the sanctity of live, that life is not important because someone somewhere is getting paid. I now move unto my first point, emergency. As you have stated, someone has texted you saying that your mom is getting eaten by a gorilla, then in all aspects, why doesn't the person texting you call emergency services. If he has all the time in the world to say 'Hey, you're moms getting eaten.' why can't he just call 911? I understand that the hand phone is a very good invention as it allows you to communicate with anyone anywhere without having to be near a land line. However, no invention is without its drawbacks as the level of focus that is needed for driving and texting is all but impossible to achieve unless one has received Apache pilot training and should not be attempted in any situation. I move onto my second point, which is a rebuttal of your fifth point. What is so important to you about your friends life that you are willing to set yourself up for your downfall. That is why ladies and gentleman, texting is illegal while driving.
Debate Round No. 1


OK first off emergency services may not reach you as fast as your friend who was with your mom, plus I'm going to look at this from a utilitarianism point of view, more people will benefit than be harmed its completely ok... also this guy who should be calling 911 probably already has and he's texting you to let you know what happened and I find that you contradict your self to condone flying an Apache helicopter and texting yet you do not support texting and driving... and yes it is illegal but its not like there haven't been bad laws in this world that's why there is and ability to remove them...

NOW lets all e rational texting and driving is very helpful to our economy VOTE YES :)


Sir, first off i would like to point out that I did not say that flying an Apache helicopter and texting, I am saying that Apache pilots have a higher level of focus than the common man. Secondly, I do not need the help, my mother does so why does it concern me at what point they reach me. Thirdly, its is now common for people to store ICE( In Case of Emergency ) numbers on their cell phone, making it easier for the paramedics or police to contact you, making your point invalid. Lastly, I agree that there are some bad laws made and there is a way to rectify or remove said law entirely, but in the case of distractions whilst driving there is no rectification needed. I would like to bring to your attention the following info.

Risk Increases of Cell Phone Tasks by Vehicle Type[20]
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.
Debate Round No. 2


Ok so your argument consists of the point that texting increases the risk of accidents but you don't actually say much else and just to make a point of clarification even if your not the one who needs help I WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW IF SOMTHING HAS HAPPENED TO YOUR MOTHER!!!!! As well as these risks will ultimately lead to all my points in round one thus helping the economy once more and that why its very important to vote for the pro on this debate its really up to you to text and drive but there are advantages



ShaunYap forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by CuriousMind54 2 years ago
Very Johnathon Swift Modest Proposal-esque. I have a feeling you're arguing with reference to that particular piece of literature, no?
Posted by msheahan99 2 years ago
I get that it's a joke but you sir are sick, a lot of people die from texting and driving. Unless your humor involves people dying don't joke about it.
Posted by msheahan99 2 years ago
I get that it's a joke but you sir are sick, a lot of people die from texting and driving. Unless your humor involves people dying don't joke about it.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
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:14 
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.