Instigator / Pro
4
1309
rating
271
debates
40.77%
won
Topic
#4723
Majority of people in most cases should use electric bicycles or electric scooters instead of cars
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
Mall
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
Contender / Con
7
1476
rating
336
debates
40.77%
won
Description
Definitions
Majority - over 50%
Electric Bicycles - Bicycles powered by electric battery that makes them much easier to ride.
Electric scooters - Scooters powered by electric battery that makes it unnecessary to push them, but they go on their own instead.
Round 1
Pro
#1
Topic
Majority of people in most cases should use electric bicycles or electric scooters instead of cars
Introduction
In our world, we should protect human lives. We should protect animal lives and the environment. Cars have done a lot of damage not just to humans, but also to animals and to the environment. In this topic, we will deal with the replacement for cars, and how electric bicycles and electric scooters make our lives not just safer, but also give us more freedom.
Definitions
Majority - over 50%
Electric Bicycles - Bicycles powered by electric battery that makes them much easier to ride.
Electric scooters - Scooters powered by electric battery that makes it unnecessary to push them, but they go on their own instead.
Arguments
1. Not using cars saves human lives
Millions of humans die in traffic every year. Teenagers, children... so many have died. Cars represent a threat, simply because car crashing into a car or car crashing into a pedestrian or car crashing in general often results in the loss of life. Not using cars saves human lives.
2. Not using cars saves animal lives
Millions of animals die in traffic every year. Animals simply dont have proper understanding of traffic, and this is what should be understood. Cars pose great threat to animals, as they are ran over very often. Animal is often left on the road to die. It is a very painful death. Not using cars saves animal lives.
3. Electric bicycles and electric scooters have lower cost and use much less resources
Cars are simply too expensive to make. They use much more resources than electric bicycles and electric scooters. By destroying human lives, they also destroy resources by decreasing workforce, and therefore production. Plus, they increase the demand for healthcare, making healthcare more expensive. Electric bicycles and electric scooters have lower cost and use much less resources.
4. Electric bicycles and electric scooters cause much less pollution
Cars are very hard to make. The process of production itself causes pollution. Cars also cause pollution if they run on fuel. They also cause pollution if they run on electricity, since most electricity is gained from sources that cause pollution. Electric bicycles and electric scooters cause much less pollution.
5. Electric bicycles and electric scooters give us more freedom
Cars are destroying lives, destroying freedom. Cars take a lot more time to be taken care of. Cars use more resources, therefore denying us of those resources which we could use for better things. Cars cause traffic jam, causing us to waste time in traffic. Cars also place drain on healthcare, with all the accidents they cause. Electric bicycles and electric scooters give us more freedom.
Conclusion
Not using cars saves human lives. Not using cars saves animal lives. Electric bicycles and electric scooters have lower cost and use much less resources. Electric bicycles and electric scooters cause much less pollution. Electric bicycles and electric scooters give us more freedom. Majority of people in most cases should use electric bicycles or electric scooters instead of cars.
Con
#2
What people should do is subjective and according to their unique circumstances. So right out the gate trying to have a topic making an objective case is instantly invalid.
You can have an opinion on what people should do. But opinions can't stand for incorrect or correct, validity or invalidity. Which would be the aim in demonstrating in a debate.
You throw that right out having a topic like this .
What people should do or not do is according to their wants. There is no other basis than the goals in the minds of people. This also speaks to why it is subjected to individual circumstances.
No one knows better than the one in that particular circumstance so how sound is it you on the outside deciding what should and not be?
You can have your opinion again. When we're talking about something that works or works well for a person it's based on something solid or established. It's not on what you think , feel or believe. It's not what you're guessing would work, feel would work but don't really know. Feelings constantly change and when we know the result of something that will work best, those results don't change. It's fixated, it's well established. Just guessing, thinking, not being absolutely certain opens up a lot of shots in the dark of probability, trial and error/failure.
You got to know to do something that works. So based on someone's situation, they'd have to know what fits right for their agenda. Whether it be for their living situation, transportation situation, location situation for one or how many individuals there is to accommodate.
So when you're talking about a choice between public transportation, bus, cab , van, car , bike, unicycle, skateboard or walking, the one that can make that decision based on the factors such as travel impact, travel distance, size of the party, elements of a given area, the limitations financially, limitations by weather, limitations by time, other compounding elements in the following regions- rural, boonies, urban , suburban, etc., can be you if you are indeed the one in said predicament.
I think I've made my point on the valid reality of it all.
"In our world, we should protect human lives. We should protect animal lives and the environment. Cars have done a lot of damage not just to humans, but also to animals and to the environment. In this topic, we will deal with the replacement for cars, and how electric bicycles and electric scooters make our lives not just safer, but also give us more freedom."
Yes see this is all according to you. Cars for me have been everything but damaging. They're completely beneficial. So which is it? It's totally subjective to each its own.
Out of all the reasons you can list, in my situation, perhaps by nextdoor neighbors, a car is what I should be using. It's the most efficient, most accommodating for multiple individuals and a decent protective shelter from all the weather elements.
If I had an elderly traveling companion that required a shuttle, a bike is incompatible. I will have to charge that this will be majority of cases. The elderly makes a big part of the population between household families, nursing and retirement homes, hospitals.
Now about fatalities, we can pull the stats out on many things.
For instance on motorcycles.
Go to iihs.org on the topic of Fatality Facts 2021
Motorcycles and ATVs.
Go to cpsc.gov , the subject is E-Scooter, E-Bike and Hoverboard Injuries and Deaths Are on the Rise; Celebrate National Fire Prevention Week with the Safe Use of Micromobility Products .
We can pick and choose to make cases. However looking at a unique case for someone about what they SHOULD DO, NOT DO, present these questions to that someone. If you think you can answer the questions for that someone, take the challenge.
To that someone, what do you want to do?
Why do you want to do what you want to do?
How do you plan to do what you want to do?
Then perhaps the biggest question, the closure, what do you expect the constructive result to be ?
If you can answer those questions for that person, please demonstrate how you figured those answers for them and we can take it from there .
Round 2
Pro
#3
Arguments
1. Not using cars saves human lives
Electric scooters and electric bicycles rarely crash, due to lower speed and shorter breaking length. Even when they do crash, due to their low mass they rarely cause much damage. In fact, pedestrian is much less likely to die if hit by a bicycle than if hit by a car, and bicycle hitting another bicycle causes much less harm than car hitting another car. Even people who ride bicycles are safer when there is much less cars. Not using cars saves human lives.
2. Not using cars saves animal lives
Electric scooters and electric bicycles pose much less danger to animals. Because of their small size, low speed and shorter breaking length, many animal lives would be saved and many animals would be spared from great pain of having to die on the road. Not using cars saves animal lives.
3. Electric bicycles and electric scooters have lower cost and use much less resources
Electric bicycle costs about 30 times less than a car. It uses much less resources. It can be used by children so children have more autonomy. Same goes for electric scooter. Electric bicycle also uses much less energy while it is used, making it much more better than car at reducing cost. Electric bicycles and electric scooters have lower cost and use much less resources.
4. Electric bicycles and electric scooters cause much less pollution
Electric bicycles and electric scooters require less production to be made and use less resources when being made. This reduces pollution caused by production. Electric bicycles and electric scooters run on electricity, and use less electricity than electric cars. They use much less resources than cars. Electric bicycles and electric scooters cause much less pollution.
5. Electric bicycles and electric scooters give us more freedom
Electric bicycles and electric scooters are cheaper, allowing us to have more money for other things. They also use much less energy than cars, saving even more money. They save lives and resources, increasing our workforce and our production power. Electric bicycles and electric scooters give us more freedom.
Conclusion
Not using cars saves human lives. Not using cars saves animal lives. Electric bicycles and electric scooters have lower cost and use much less resources. Electric bicycles and electric scooters cause much less pollution. Electric bicycles and electric scooters give us more freedom. Majority of people in most cases should use electric bicycles or electric scooters instead of cars.
Rebuttals
So based on someone's situation, they'd have to know what fits right for their agenda. Whether it be for their living situation, transportation situation, location situation for one or how many individuals there is to accommodate.
This topic deals with most cases. Besides, instead of one car accomodating 5 people, there can be 5 people riding electric bicycles. Or 1 person riding electric bicycle with attachment for extra passangers.
So when you're talking about a choice between public transportation, bus, cab , van, car , bike, unicycle, skateboard or walking, the one that can make that decision based on the factors such as travel impact
Traveling is easier on electric bicycle and electric scooter.
travel distance
In most cases, people dont travel very far. Electric bicycles can have over 100 miles range.
, size of the party
It is actually more fun to travel in groups on bicycles.
, elements of a given area
Most countries have roads suitable for bicycles. In fact, I cant think of any that doesnt have. After all, cars demand good roads too.
the limitations financially
Electric bicycle is 30 times cheaper than a car.
, limitations by weather
In most cases, bicycle can be used. Unless there is a hurricane or a flood, I dont see what weather would prevent you from riding a bicycle.
limitations by time
I am not sure what you mean here.
other compounding elements in the following regions- rural, boonies, urban , suburban, etc., can be you if you are indeed the one in said predicament.
Bicycle can literally go where car cant. It can ride in the forest, in the small spaces...
Yes see this is all according to you. Cars for me have been everything but damaging. They're completely beneficial. So which is it? It's totally subjective to each its own.
You cant seriously ignore the millions of lives lost every year due to cars.
decent protective shelter from all the weather elements.
If you are afraid of the rain, there are solutions to that, such as outfit against rain.
If I had an elderly traveling companion that required a shuttle, a bike is incompatible. I will have to charge that this will be majority of cases. The elderly makes a big part of the population between household families, nursing and retirement homes, hospitals.
Most of the eldery people can ride electric bicycle or scooter. Besides, bicycles can have attachments for extra passangers.
Go to cpsc.gov , the subject is E-Scooter, E-Bike and Hoverboard Injuries and Deaths Are on the Rise; Celebrate National Fire Prevention Week with the Safe Use of Micromobility Products .
Most of those deaths are precisely because of cars.
To that someone, what do you want to do?
Decrease the use of cars.
Why do you want to do what you want to do?
To save lives of humans, animals...
How do you plan to do what you want to do?
By convincing people to use electric bicycles instead.
Then perhaps the biggest question, the closure, what do you expect the constructive result to be ?
Safer, better world.
Con
#4
"This topic deals with most cases. Besides, instead of one car accomodating 5 people, there can be 5 people riding electric bicycles. Or 1 person riding electric bicycle with attachment for extra passangers. "
Ok most cases could be people electing a vehicle such as I . The reality is there are people that do. Many do. That's why you see so many on the road. I don't know how much "most" is supposed to be but many elect as I . A vehicle works best for me for instance because 4-5 people wish to be accommodated with a passenger van. They want shelter, they want comfort. They want to sleep while traveling. They don't wish to operate anything to transport themselves. If there is a child or an infant, they want them in a passenger vehicle. I think your position is looking at reality too narrow.
"Traveling is easier on electric bicycle and electric scooter."
According to who? See this is where you have to come to terms in who decides what's easiest for themselves.
"In most cases, people dont travel very far. Electric bicycles can have over 100 miles range."
How do you know? Do you know most people's situations?
Do you think I want to travel a great or long distance on a scooter?
There can be many that have to travel all kinds of distances, run all kinds of errands for instance in a morning routine , requiring the cargo space , passenger space for people needing picked up , dropping people off that want the accommodation,need the accommodation. They may be handicapped. Carpooling can be just the effective way if there's a desire for organization, everything is in one place , one parking spot making things more efficient and comfortable.
Don't think about what appeals to you.
"It is actually more fun to travel in groups on bicycles."
According to who? This is subjective like this topic.
"Most countries have roads suitable for bicycles. In fact, I cant think of any that doesnt have. After all, cars demand good roads too."
Well leave it up to the person to decide. There is no they "should do this or that". What should be is whatever that fits them.
"Electric bicycle is 30 times cheaper than a car."
So in the context of what I was saying, I'm dealing with the entirety of someone's situation. You chopped up the context into isolated lines .
"So when you're talking about a choice between public transportation, bus, cab , van, car , bike, unicycle, skateboard or walking, the one that can make that decision based on the factors "
I'm trying to encompass all these different variables that can arise in someone's situation. If public transportation comes into the equation, it may be that neither a car or a bike is suitable or on the agenda. The person may not have the means to pay for either car or bike . They may financially be dependent and the provider can't provide or won't provide the funds. But can offer public transit fare or a ride in their car . These may be the options they're left with. They may be in a program where they get free public transportation and that works best for them. They may like meeting people and have made friends in their public transit itinerary. They make love someone else to drive instead of memorizing or storing the route. There are just many variables that you're not giving thought to or haven't expressed here. The list can go on and on. Being that you're looking at this from a self centered view, it figures.
"I am not sure what you mean here."
An example then. I have an option of taking a car that may be faster than a bike that I can do more things, haul things that would be less efficient with a bike or a scooter. It seems like you've forgotten why motor vehicles were invented.
If I'm in a position where a longer route exists for me that is safe to ride on a scooter and I need a shorter route because of time, with my options only being a bus and a scooter, I should take the bus.
"Bicycle can literally go where car cant. It can ride in the forest, in the small spaces..."
That's nice. Just think about what's available to people in different areas. A bicycle may or may not be safe to ride on in my particular area. May not be efficient and certainly doesn't accommodate passenger space. I'm not putting a newborn on a bicycle.
"You cant seriously ignore the millions of lives lost every year due to cars."
It doesn't change what I just said. Cars have been beneficial to me and all the other people I see out on the road using them.
"If you are afraid of the rain, there are solutions to that, such as outfit against rain."
Another solution would be a motor vehicle. Rain is not the only type of weather by the way. A vehicle can accommodate for varying temperatures, all kinds of weather so it works best for me and many others.
Look my position is not that one should be taken over the other. It's acknowledging that any of these options a person should choose based on suitability that they'd only know.
A person says I should take the bike , I need the exercise, cool. If an elderly person says I should take this car because it's physically accommodating, so be it. See that's the reality we're in.
You're arguing out of an opinion that means only what it does to you. It's not the truth of reality so that can't be demonstrated here .
"Most of the eldery people can ride electric bicycle or scooter. Besides, bicycles can have attachments for extra passangers."
I don't know how much"most" is when you say it. I do however see many elderly folks driving cars, have handicap stickers and markers on parking lots. So apparently they're doing what they should do as it's best for them. If someone wants to ride in a car then try to balance a bike , who are you to reign justification or rule it out over their lives?
They're the ones living in their bodies. If anybody would know what's comfortable for their bodily conditions, they would. I don't see elderly people on bikes and scooters.
"Extra passengers". When a car , van, suv holds more folks, then those folks should elect what holds the most at once altogether not separated.
"Most of those deaths are precisely because of cars."
You can continue to take the light away every time I shine it somewhere. What I'm shining it on is still there. It simply doesn't change the perils with bikes and etc.
You have an opinion of cars. Your position is not more valid.
You missed the point of those four questions. It really just demonstrates your self centered focus.
Those questions are to be directed towards a person in general,not you .
The questions are not asking what you think unless you are delusional in thinking you can answer for somebody you don't even know.
You continue to dismantle the context.
"However looking at a unique case for someone about what they SHOULD DO, NOT DO, present these questions to that someone. "
Ok to that someone, not you.
"If you think you can answer the questions for that someone, take the challenge."
The truth is , you can't and there's no bother to explain how you can.
If you asked me these four questions, do you think my answers will be what you gave?
You ask them to someone else, do you think their answers will be the same?
The point is EVERYBODY HAS THEIR OWN SITUATION TO APPLY THESE QUESTIONS TO. THEIR , THEIR , THEIR ANSWERS WILL VERY BASED ON WHAT THEY SHOULD DO FOR THEMSELVES.
Each of us has our own agenda so this one size fits most is ridiculous. Again, have your opinion, your entitled to it. But the reality is that which your opinion is not .
Round 3
Pro
#5
Since its the last round, I will just sum it up.
Conclusion
Majority of people in most cases should use electric bicycles or electric scooters instead of cars. Not using cars saves human lives and animal lives. Electric bicycles and electric scooters have lower cost and use much less resources. Electric bicycles and electric scooters cause much less pollution. Electric bicycles and electric scooters give us more freedom. Cars can in most cases be replaced by electric scooter or electric bicycle. Electric bicycle with attachment can transport multiple people. Electric bicycle can go where car cant, and can avoid traffic jams. Traffic jams are caused by cars.
Con
#6
I'll just reiterate:
"Each of us has our own agenda so this one size fits most is ridiculous. Again, have your opinion, your entitled to it. But the reality is that which your opinion is not ."
This is why the opposing side had no rebuttal to what I said last. The opposing side hasn't consider ALL the different variables and situations that can't be just quantified as the least but not the majority. You don't know how many situations there are and the exact circumstances of each. All the opposing side is thinking of is life from their perspective.
That's their reality sure. Not everybody or "most" of everybody else's. This topic like another I've participated in with this individual comes off as naive.
We gotta become more experienced, more cultured within the world we're in .
Peace be .
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:
Both parties had reasonable arguments, but Pro failed in BOP.
Pro never showed that the majority of travelers would find that the utility of electrics was better than that of "enclosed " vehicles.
I am giving argument points to Con.
Good debate. I see that you like debating a variety of topics. Is there another topic you wish to debate? Right now I have some free time for more topics.
It's just information. Whether you want to call it a source of information or whatever. That's all it is.
Con--
"Go to iihs.org on the topic of Fatality Facts 2021
Motorcycles and ATVs.
Go to cpsc.gov , the subject is E-Scooter, E-Bike and Hoverboard Injuries and Deaths Are on the Rise; Celebrate National Fire Prevention Week with the Safe Use of Micromobility Products ."
not exactly "sourcing" i would consider though.