WE OUGHT TO OPPOSE MASS DEVELOPMENT OF FLYING CARS FOR CIVILIAN USAGE.

"THIS DEBATE IS ANOTHER NO BRAINER. FLYING CARS WOULD BE FAR TOO HAZARDOUS TO SOCIETY!" Who are you to say what would and wouldn't be good for society? If in our free market, the demand and technology becomes available, I see no reason why we should forcibly oppose flying cars. "THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THAT FLYING CARS WOULD BE A TERRORIST'S DREAM. TERRORIST COULD SLAM INTO BUILDINGS WITH PLENTY OF SUCCESS, JUST LIKE 9/11. THEY WOULDN'T NEED PRIOR TRAINING OR UNDERCOVER WORK TO HIJACK A PLAIN. THEY COULD SIMPLY GO TO YOUR NEAREST CAR LOT, PURCHASE A FLYING CAR, AND CAUSE MASS DESTRUCTION." It seems you assume there would be no regulation, no monitoring. With this new technology available, new types of licenses and tests will be developed to determine who can and can't own a flying car. A terrorist could go to a used car lot today, buy a used car, pack it with explosives, and run it into a building. Yet that does not happen today. "THE SECOND BIG ISSUE IS THAT CRIMINALS WOULD HAVE PRACTICALLY NO LIMITS IN ESCAPING CRIME SCENES. WITH REGULAR CARS, THE POLICE CAN USE SPIKES, CAN CUT OFF ROADS, AND CAN SLAM INTO THE GETAWAY CARS OF THE CRIMINALS. BUT WITH FLYING CARS, CRIMINALS WILL BE ABLE TO MOVE IN ALL THREE DIMENSIONS." Once again it seems you are assuming that the only technology that would of grown by the time flying cars are available, are the cars. This is not true, by that point police surveillance, and tactics to catch criminals would most likely be wildly different, suited for the times. If it were needed, the police force would also have flying cars. If they're available to the public, I see no reason why they wouldn't be available to the police. This puts the criminals you speak of on even footing with the police as they are today. Today both parties can travel in "TWO DIMENSIONS" and when flying cars become availble both parties will be able to fly in "ALL THREE DIMENSIONS." We don't get rid of cars now just because people have the chance to get away from the police, no need to do it with flying cars. "FLYING CARS WILL CONSUME WAY MORE ENERGY THAN REGULAR CARS AND IF THEY RUN ON GAS, THE CO2 LEVELS IN THE ATMOSPHERE WILL SKYROCKET." One more time, you seem to think no other technology will have improved. By the time flying cars are available to the general public there may very well be new fuel sources that don't release CO2. Just as cars are regulated today, I suspect flying cars will get the same treatment. A flying car company would not be able to release a flying car without it meeting specific standard deemed safe. "THE AIRPLANE INDUSTRY WOULD SUFFER A HUGE BLOW AS PEOPLE WOULD PREFER TO USE FLYING CARS INSTEAD OF GETTING ON AIRPLANES. LOTS OF PEOPLE WOULD LOSE JOBS BECAUSE OF THIS. BIG BLOW TO ECONOMY." While available to the general public, just like fancy cars today, odds are flying cars would be a luxury. The general populous would still have to buy plane tickets for long distance travel, and keep the industry alive. Today people can have private jets, but you don't see the airline industry going out of business because of it. "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE STUDENT CONGRESS HERE THAT WE PERSONALLY GO FIND ALL PROMOTERS AND FLYING CARS, LOCK THEM UP, AND THROW AWAY THE KEY!" I support your right to oppose flying cars, but you should not do so with force. In doing so you would be denying people their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness just because they are doing something you don't agree with.