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

UN ban on drones

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/27/2014 Category: Technology
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 543 times Debate No: 64052
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)





1.)Drones are used in situations where manned flight is considered too risky or difficult. This make it easier, for when something like this occurs they would still be able to be on the look out ad this is because there is no individual in it. It is computerized so no one will get hurt.

2.) They provide troops with a 24-hour "eye in the sky", seven days a week. Each aircraft can stay aloft for up to 17 hours at a time, loitering over an area and sending back real-time imagery of activities on the ground. This is great because no matter what time it is, there will always be surveillance.

C.) There should be an un ban on drones.


1.) You said drones are used in risky or difficult flight situations. Lets say the risky situation is that the government is spying on the average person and they don't want to get caught. 2.) Drones also have negative effects on troops. Many drone operators suffer from emotional and physiological stress. Drone operators may feel remorse or guilt after they attack and kill innocent people. UAV's are loaded with bombs and missiles. They can drop a bomb and kill a lot of innocent civilians. 3.) Drones make the horrors of war appear as innocuous as a video game. C.) Therefore, drones should be banned.
Debate Round No. 1


1.they are used in risky situations, when it would be to dangerous for us ourselves to look over what's going on. has nothing to do with spying on others if they aren't doing nothing wrong, only when something is occurring. Just look at all what our country has gone through. Wasn't that enough for you ? Do you want more terrorist attacks? Do you want more people dying! ? Or would you prefer the drones to watch at all times for we can be safe.

2.It might kill many civilians but what happened when the twin towers were hit? They were innocent people.. Drone operators may feel guilt but so do the actual military at war in which have to kill them face to face.

C. Therefore, un ban on drones .


1.) In round two, premise one you are commit the ad hominem fallacy. You begin to attack me when you ask me if I want more terrorist attacks. You also ask me if I want more people to die. I never implied any of that. Those questions you asked me do not add to your argument. Drones can be used for spying. FBI director Robert Mueller said, "the nations top law enforcement bureau uses drones to conduct surveillance on U.S soil." The FBI says it themselves.
2.) In round two, premise two you commit the red herring fallacy. You talk about the twin towers which are irrelevant to the argument. We are talking about drones not the twin towers.
3.) Drones kill innocent lives and cause people to get angry . That is why there is hatred toward America
Debate Round No. 2


1. Yes FBI says it, like I said... Look at All The terrorist attacks in the US. Your stating that they are hurting people ... But if they are over U.S soil then are you stating they are hurting us as the civilians, you too are getting away from your argument while I'm trying to prove my point

2. I'm giving you examples why we would use the drones, that's why I brought up the twin towers if it wasn't clear for you. Drones can be used for many other things, not just to be aware of Attacks in which would be to dangerous for is humans to be in them, that's why they are computerized .

3. Drones in republic of Congo patrol the border looking for illegal arms shipments or troop movements. Over the forests they seek out militia encampments etc.


1. You are committing the red herring fallacy again. Terrorist attacks shouldn't be your focus. We are talking about drones. My concern with drones also extends to police enforcement. Drones can have non lethal weapons such as rubber bullets and tear gas as well as lethal weapons. I wouldn't want to live in a world where I couldn't accuse someone of shooting me because a drone did it and I'd have no idea who was controlling the drone. What if people were peacefully protesting and a drone starts to spray them with tear gas? Nobody would be able to see who actually was attacking them.

2.Drones can be hacked as well. People with bad intentions could create havoc or worse attack people.

C. Therefore, there should be a ban on drones.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Hawkeye117 1 year ago
Ok really you saying the drone operaters feeling remorse for killing innocent civilians yes that's terrible but all pilots that are forced to drops ordinance on ground target well feel some remorse if it is later found out they killed civilians it isant limited to drone pilots alone plus that's war its a sad part of war but that's what it is civilians die in war that's just a fact people need to get over that fact now it it was an intended massicure that's different but dropping a bomb on enemy targets and killing innocents at the same time ok what's new that's not going to change with the baking of drones obviously you havent seen death and war a war zone is like please don't use drones killing civilians as a way to debate for a ban on UAV's and really you say many drone pilots face emotional and phycological stress well that may be true but so do pilots of bombers and fighters etc they all face the same stress although the actual pilots face more with the fact they can get shot down and die i don't know about you but that's more stressful then just remotely flying a drone so with all that extra stress and still the killing of innocents should there be a ban on aircraft controlled by pilots as its not healthy for them and they kill innocent civilians and carry missiles and bombs that can kill hundreds if not thousands of people. All carcasm aside con you need to make a better argument, yours hold no weight at all and easily dismissed
No votes have been placed for this debate.