Should driving while talking on the cellphone be allowed?
Vote Here
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
Started: | 4/17/2008 | Category: | Society | ||
Updated: | 14 years ago | Status: | Voting Period | ||
Viewed: | 3,383 times | Debate No: | 3674 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (15)
I'll let my opponent speak first on this one, simply because I don't like letting all my stuff out of my bag before the other dude has spoken =P
I do NOT believe driving while talking on a cellphone should be allowed. I believe this because, I mean, we all do it, I see people who are on the phone, and are oblivious of everything around them. When people around me on the road are talking on their cellphone I feel like it's a danger to me and everyone else around me because all of the people I've seen, who talk on the phone, swerve from one lane to the next, speed up, slow down. It's clearly a danger to me and everyone else. |
![]() |
Yeah it's obiviously a danger, because it grasp our attention away. But let's take it from a different standpoint, dbaldwin1215.
What if we were to ban cell phones from being used while driving. Cell phones are one of the most habituated way of communicating, and in this world there are a lot of crisis. Let's do a scenario, shall we? This is Mike. Mike is out of town in Orlando on a business trip. It turns out his son in Miami where he lives was riding a bike and was hit by a car. He gets the call and needs to get back to Miami immediately, because his dying son is in the hospital. Orlando to Miami is a pretty far drive, and he needs to get to his son as quick as possible. He does not know how his son is doing, whether or not he's improving or going down hill, because he has no means of communication without a cellphone while driving in his car. Therefore, out of panic and wonder, causing him to rush which causes him to not only speed, but delay his sense of reaction and thought as a result panic and worry, which could be lessened if there was a way to communicate. which if enough people are involved in these sort of crisis without any means of communication, could greater the risk of collision.
If a person receives a call on his/her cellphone and it is absolutely imperative that they answer, I believe there should be a lane specified on EVERY major highway or rural interstate for them. A Cellphone Lane, if you will. If this course of action is not possible, then it should be the driver's responsibility to decide whether the call is unexpected, and therefore important, and pull over onto the shoulder of the road. Lets take that scenario you were speaking of: Say Mike received this call on his way to Orlando. He would have to take into account, "Is this call unexpected?" If he has reason to believe it is in fact unexpected, he can then safely slow down and pull over onto the side of the road without going any further. So you see, there are a couple of alternatives to talking while driving. |
![]() |
And let me, yet again, turn this debate in another direction.
If we have a bunch of people driving on this busy highway, asking people to pull off to the side of the road could not only cause confusion and road rage, but will also leave a bigger door open for careless mistakes. There are many many people on the high ways today, and asking one to pull off the side of the road, especially if it involves getting in touch with a relative for a crisis related issue, it would cause a disturbance in the natural flow of driving that people will find not only aggravating (likening somebody to road rage and impatience) but confusing as well, and leave a bigger opportunity for careless driving mistakes, from lack of thought and mentality (depending on the depth of the crisis and relationship with someone at risk) Not only that, but in the middle of rush hour traffic, it increases that risk to an even greater level.
Since you've taken this debate and distorted it in every direction possible, I'd like to do the same. Think about this: A driver gets a flat tire or has a blowout, he has no choice but to pull off to the side of the road. I know getting a blowout poses a danger, but it isn't like someone would be able to keep driving on a shredded tire. Who's to say that taking an emergency phone call would be any different? It wouldn't be like it is not important. Back to that Mike scenario: I would think (and I hope you do too) that his son getting hit by a car would be a big deal, and he'd like to find out as soon as he can. All it comes down to now is the question: "Are people smart enough to make the decision of what is and what is not important?" I believe with time, less people will grow smarter about making this decision, not only because, well, after a while it would get annoying, but that with practice comes experience, if you will. I think it would be much safer to slow up gradually and pull off to the side of the road than to swerve all over the place, causing people to have to dodge their vehicle. |
![]() |
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by MaxHayslip 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by gr33kloser 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 3 | 0 |
Vote Placed by draxxt 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 3 | 0 |
Vote Placed by Aietius 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 3 | 0 |
Vote Placed by justlikeclockwrk 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 3 | 0 |
Vote Placed by tangerineman91 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by sexyjesse0720 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 3 | 0 |
Vote Placed by brian_eggleston 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 3 | 0 |
Vote Placed by left_wing_mormon 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by genaro9311 14 years ago
SexyCracker | dbaldwin1215 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 3 | 0 |
And those people went to the side of the road to stop and answer. (you know when they get mad at you because they had to stop for such stupid stuff :'))
I honnestly don't see the problem with prohibiting it.
In fact, over here in Belgium, it is law. You can only call driving with a handsfree set, so that you can at least react with both hands.
Furthermore, there has been test once (in mythbusters :')).
They did a driving test. Once with the maximum amount of alcohol consumed by the driver. Once simply while making a phone call.
The results leave little doubt of the risks.
its my picture. it's me.
i'd effin know if i photoshopped it, and if you want proof get the hell over here, i'd like to show you all my pictures that look the exact same that aren't effin photoshopped.
i think you guys are just jealous because i'm so damn beautiful.
when i uploaded it it made it kind of glossy, but i think it does that with any picture you upload.
so, it's not photoshopped. i would kind of know.
talk about something you actually know about, don't run your mouth with "it's clearly photoshopped" when you clearly don't even know, I don't even have photoshop.
think before you open your mouth, betch.
you leave me over here LOLing because you are more concerned with my photo than the actual debate, just chillax. nobody gives a crap.
if you want to accuse everyone of photoshop go to a rate my picture site.
so. go play in traffic.
kthanks<3
By the way, here in the UK, using mobile telephones while driving is illegal so most people either have hands-free kits installed or use Bluetooth devices. In addition to the obvious safety benefits, this has the added advantage of leaving one hand free to use to hold your beer.