Instigator / Pro
9
1472
rating
2
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#1858

Should legal drinking age be dropped back down to 18?

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
12
Better sources
2
8
Better legibility
3
4
Better conduct
4
4

After 4 votes and with 19 points ahead, the winner is...

Discipulus_Didicit
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
28
1596
rating
9
debates
88.89%
won
Description

No information

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro seemed to think that 18 year old people would just break the law anyway, and that 18 year old people will manage their consumption of alcohol responsibly. Con dismantled both of these in my opinion. His shoplifting analogy was acknowledged but never rebutted by Pro, as a result I am left believing that Pro's first argument didn't hold up to Con's criticism. For point two, Pro pointed out the clear health drawbacks to consuming alcohol that Pro acknowledged, along with the increased risk for addiction. Once again Pro fails to properly address this point. Lastly, Con points out that choosing 18 as the legal drinking age was arbitrary, once again there was not a valid response to this point.

So, I see that alcohol deals tremendous damage to young people, along with Pro's 18 year barrier to entry being completely arbitrary.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro repeats his arguments and concedes at one point where alcohol is harmful. Con did none of that. Con also used sources.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Argument: Pro repeated arguments in each round. Con's arguments successfully rebutted all Pro arguments. Points to Con

Sources: Pro had no sources. Con presented multiple, reliable sources. points to Con

S&G: Con had fewer S&G issues points to Con

Conduct: Both treated one another respectfully.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pretty straight forward. Pro agrees it's more harmful at a young age, and con makes an argument that lowering the drinking age will cause increased availability to those even younger (effectively, right now 18 year olds can get it easily, but with the change 15 year olds will be given it just as easily as current 18 year olds).

Con further used respectable sources to both show the harm from underage drinking, and that the drinking age is an effective deterrent. I would have left this tied had pro used a source for the gang claim (a competing harm).