Why the Driving age should NOT be raised to 18

I don't know how I managed to miss this at first, but it appears that there are only two rounds of actual clash in this debate :\. Also, despite Pro's permission to offer a new argument in this round, I'm simply going to continue the clash on the issues already at play; otherwise Pro wouldn't have a chance to respond. I may however utilize new evidence in my refutations, as my opponent has changed the nature of their arguments in this round with the inclusion of new warrants and new evidence. Before getting into my final rebuttals and voters, I would like to reminds the voters of the two main arguments working in the Con's favor as well as clarify the burdens via standard debate etiquette. Con's arguments are as follows; Cognitive Development: That the human brain is not fully developed until between the ages of 24-25 and, Accountability: That parents ought not be responsible for their children's mistakes // that raising the driving age would increase accountability for drivers. The Burdens are as follows Pro, Must prove the resolution to be true. Unless they can do this the vote must go Con. Con, must reasonably disprove the Affirmative. That said, I will now follow a line-by-line refutations of my opponent's arguments as of the prior round. First things first, different States deal with giving driving licenses differently My opponent claims that for one to gain their drivers' license they must must pass the D. A. T. A course, however from what research I've been able to find, this only the case in Florida[3]. Different states have differing laws on what must be done in order to recieve a driver's license[4]. Some states such as Michigan, Kansas and Iowa let kids as young as 14 get their license, while some don't even require the students to have a drivers permit first. [3] . http://www.123driving.com... [4] . http://www.2pass.co.uk... My opponent has overlooked several crucial facts about driving laws in the United States, and their assertions on prevention must be discounted accordingly. This impact also bleeds into my opponent's argument that students who don't pass their drivers test don't get their license; so when we realize that States like Kansas not only allow teenagers to get a license as young as 14, but that these 14 year olds don't even need to have a driver's permit first,[4] we realize there is a massive disadvantage overlooked by my opponent. Finally when my opponent speaks of reflexes he fails to realize that the discernment as to when to utilize one's reflexes is something that comes with age. This is a huge impact of the Con's cognitive development argument and must be recognized when dealing with this argument; while younger people may react more quickly those reactions are not always guided by a discerning mentality. The next thing on the list is public transportation and College Most colleges are in major cities, or at least cities with a sizable amount of people in them. In these cities, there exists a myriad of different options in public transportation; Buses, Trolleys, subways, sidewalks -- and many college students don't even bring their vehicle with them to school. Furthermore public schools offer students free transportation to and from school[5], even when they aren't required to do so. [5] . http://www.myreporter.com... Therefore any argument which concerns the transit of students to and from school isn't viable as there are means to get to school that exclude driving. Furthermore student loans aren't an impact as college students are more than likely going to be eighteen years of age and will be able to work to pay for their schooling. And even if this isn't the case most colleges provide 'work-study' job[6] availabilities to their students anyway. Finally loans aren't the only way to pay for college, students can apply for grants, gain scholarships and even some loans can become grants if the student performs to a certain standard[7] [6] . http://studentaid.ed.gov... [7] . http://www.hhloans.com... Finally let's talk about accountability and parental responsibility While it's nice when students are able to work while in high school, it's not required of them. It is the responsibility of the parent to make sure that their children have all the things they need for survival, the children shouldn't be burdened with this responsibility; to require a child to work and bring home an income is child labor. What this means is that any argument of a teenager needing a license to drive themselves to and from work is illegitimate as they shouldn't have to work; if they want to and their parents are willing the parents will find a way to get them to their job, but it shouldn't be required. Furthermore the issue of accountability was never addressed by my opponent, which is a pretty big voting issue. No matter what one's age is, driving is a pretty risky task; for a parent to be forced to bear the responsibility of their children's actions when it is not necessary is unjust. Instead such a responsibility should not be placed into a child's hands until they are at an age where they are accountable for their own actions. While the student's brain will not have fully formed by the age of 18, it will be better than when the child was 16 or even 14 (seriously, thing about your own logic at the age of 14 guys. ) In Conclusion My opponent has failed to provide a compelling argument, whereas I have been successful in refuting their arguments.