Return to CreateDebate.comswansonace • Join this debate community

Swanson ACE Debate



Welcome to Swanson ACE Debate!

Swanson ACE Debate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS 19ptassoul

Reward Points:18
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
88%
Arguments:20
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
8 most recent arguments.
1 point

I agree with the fact that 16 year-olds need to be able to rely on themselves for transportation. Kids are going to need jobs, get to school, and if they have younger siblings parents have to worry about them too. Also, if the driving age is raised to 18, kids are more likely to be off to college. If the age stays at 16, kids will have two years of experience before they go to college, because their parents won't be able to help them at college.

1 point

I 100% agree with your thinking. Age doesn't have to do with more crashes, little experience does. If kids start driving at a younger age, they will only have more experience.

1 point

You stated a point for either side in this claim. If maturity is what we are concerned about, and it is only two years worth, Why bother changing the law?

1 point

I agree with you. There are several studies that show that young age doesn't cause accidents, little experience does.

1 point

I disagree with this. Crashing a car does not have to do with age, it has to do with experience. 18 year-olds would not have any more experience than 16 year-olds. This source shows this argument- http://www.yukaichou.com/chou-musings/age-experience-too-young/#.U1eiNnnxbHM

1 point

If drivers start at the age of 16, they will have more experience driving and be even better when they get to college. Also, if 16 year-olds and 18 year-olds have to make smart decisions, so now the only difference is changing the law, and that is 10x harder to do!!

1 point

Just because they are older, does not mean they are more experienced. A 16 year-old could make bad decisions as well as an 18 year-old. It is only two years of difference, so not much more maturity is gained and 18 year-olds would not have more experience.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/1115/88736.0001.001.pdf?sequence=2 This source states that just because kids are older, doesn't mean they are more experienced.

1 point

I believe that the driving age should not be raised to the age of 18 because kids are more likely to drink and drive, in many cases, kids are no longer living with their parents for help and support, and kids are getting closer to college, so the more experience they get driving before college, the better they will be when they get there. Lastly, the source http://www.yukaichou.com/chou-musings/age-experience-too-young/#.U1eiNnnxbHM clearly states that young drivers are not worse than older drivers, better drivers are experienced.

19ptassoul has not yet created any debates.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here