Return to CreateDebate.comacebertrand • Join this debate community

Bertrand's ACE Debate


19asiebers's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of 19asiebers's arguments, looking across every debate.
1 point

In Indonesia 56 woman are forced to run around in the hot son for wearing non regulation shoes

Supporting Evidence: UA (www-personal.umich.edu)
1 point

I have something that is very disturbing. Nike has terrible working conditions. In Vietnam Factories, they have chemicals that can cause liver, kidney, and brain damage, that are at 177 times the legal limit. 77% of workers have to deal with respiratory problems.

Supporting Evidence: UA (www-personal.umich.edu)
4 points

Yes, and even though Nike's been around since 1964, Many people have already been expecting good quality out of Under Armour.

4 points

Yes, but soccer isn't the only sport in the world. Under Armour has been featured in movies such as Oliver Stone's Any Given Sunday and The Replacements

1 point

The products can help you stay warmer, longer, without adding unnecessary weight.

Supporting Evidence: UA (www.cnbc.com)
7 points

They also have a product the is titled "Cold Black" which reflects the sun.

3 points

They may have experience, but according to http://underarmour.wikispaces.com/price people expect good quality out of them, therefore, they kkep buying UA's products.

7 points

Under Armour has better quality. Under Armour price their products on quality, not just because they want a bunch of money. Their clothing is only expensive because they have good quality.

Supporting Evidence: UA (underarmour.wikispaces.com)
3 points

According to www.CNBC.com/id/100925505 Under Armour has better innovation. They have clothing that battles the elements.

1 point

On Dec. 29, 2005, four teenage boys from Chicago went out for a late-night drive and had a terrible accident.

Supporting Evidence: accident (teacher.scholastic.com)
1 point

If you make drivers ed earlier, 14 year olds are even more irresponsible.

1 point

You don't know what they'll do when they are high or drunk.

1 point

But it's mostly teenagers that do. Adults can get in more trouble with the law.

1 point

You make a good point, but when you are first born, you are an infant. Look at your self now. You've grown. Your brain will keep growing more at 18. It will have grown since you have been 16 right?

1 point

Either way, it doesn't matter if you are 16 or 18 you could text and drive. 16 year olds are more likely to.

1 point

Then buy a car. But I doubt after your college fees you will be able to buy a car.

1 point

Teens are most likely with there friends. They experience peer pressure, puberty, all of which can make them act differently.

0 points

But there are so many that aren't. I've seen at least one driving accident every week caused by teenagers. And that's just the NE. There is the rest of Wisconsin and the rest of the country!

1 point

You can't tell if a person will give into peer pressure just by looking at them. You have to spend years with them. Nobody wants to be that involved.

1 point

Exactly. We all face peer pressure. Do you really think you are going to follow the laws while you are drunk. I don't think so.

1 point

Things teenagers experience: Drugs, alcohol, drunk driving, distractions, and peer pressure. All of which, are experienced behind the wheel

1 point

As it said in the experiment, it was mostly teenage girls. but men are more likely to drive drunk. It's mostly teenagers because there are so many new influences and things to try. They are introduced to drugs,alcohol, and other adult things that they don't know how to use wisely.

1 point

But there is so many teens that aren't responsible, it would be more reasonable to make everyone wait for their licence.

1 point

Exactly. It's better for the environment. It's not that hard to get around. People before cars got around. Why can't everyone now?

1 point

You may think it's an inconvenience, but it's better to

be safe than dead, or hurt. If you get hurt, it wastes more time.

1 point

Canadian researchers tried to untangle the influence of age and experience on crashes involving beginners by dividing drivers 16, 17, and 18 years old according to whether they had been driving less than a year or more than a year. The main finding, reported in 1992, is that 16 year-olds, especially girls this age, had higher rates of injury crashes than older teenagers who also were new to the road.

Supporting Evidence: A Life insurance finding (www.accuquote.com)
1 point

Yes, but when they are older, they will have more consequences with the law.

1 point

Most colleges don't allow vehicles on campus. Most campus's only allow you to walk or bike.

1 point

When they are older, they will be more cautious because they can get in more trouble with the law.

2 points

When you are older, you are wiser, and that makes you more mature. When you have to wait to get your license, you gain more maturity.

2 points

Raising the driving age would help everyone. With our technology advancing, we are getting more and more safer cars. But having safer cars doesn't make drivers safer. In fact, it may make drivers more reckless because they think having a safer car will save them when they are being careless.

2 points

Between 1995- 2004 there were 30,917 fatalities in accidents involving 15-17 year old's. 1/3 of the deaths are the teenage drivers.

2 points

Would your parents rather drive you around, or not have you around at all? Parents would rather drive their kids around, then have them get in a accident and die.

3 points

Although that may be true, I disagree. If you raise the driving age, teenagers will be more responsible, and more mature

2 points

I believe the driving age should be raised because sixteen year old's are simply not responsible enough. If they start at a older age, they will be more cautious and responsible on the road.



Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]