Question: Is cell phone radiation safe?

Title: Cell Phone Radiation is Safe for Humans Content: Well actually cell phone and other mobile devices emit radiofrequency energy which is a type of electromagnetic radiation. Electromagnetic radiation can be categorised as ionizing and non-ionizing. Exposure to ionizing radiation, such as from x-rays, is known to increase the risk of cancer and brain tumours. So actually cell phone radiation can have a lot of unwanted side effects and circumstances if taken in large amounts.

Title: Cell Phone Radiation is Safe for Humans Content: Obviously it's not healthy, but the amount of radiation is so low, there really wont be any side effects.

Title: Cell Phone Radiation is Safe for Humans Content: (OK so now this is the fourth and final debating round, first of all good luck to my opponent, you have done really well and your information has been really well researched. :) Now I will move away from the whole 'cancer and tumour' subheading as we have discussed that a bit too much. In my fourth and last point I will be talking about additional health risks (no, not cancer) cell phone radiation causes the body in both genders. These are sleep quality, baby development and pacemaker functioning. I will start by explaining how it affects sleep quality. It doesn't just harm your eyes from the powerful light phones emit but can also cause insomnia, headaches and confusion. The radiation may also disrupt production of the hormone melatonin, which controls your body"s internal rhythms. Baby Development: How it is affected. The national public awareness campaign, called the BabySafe Project, is being coordinated by Grassroots Environmental Education and Environmental Health Trust, and is based on independent scientific research linking exposure to wireless radiation from cell phones during pregnancy to neurological and behavioral problems in offspring that resemble Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children. Finally, how cell phone radiation affects pacemakers. For those of you who don't know what a pacemaker is, it is a small machine that helps people with heart conditions like irregular heartbeat and heart block. A pacemaker is a device that gives off electrical impulses to your heart. These make your heart beat more regularly. It consists of a battery, a tiny computer and a generator in a thin metal box, along with wires that connect the pacemaker to your heart. Now for a cell phone's radiation to affect this is a gigantic danger to the person. If it makes the pacemaker suddenly stop working by the cell phone's radiation interfering with the pacemaker's signal it can have even fatal results. The ways they interfere are; -Stopping the pacemaker from delivering the stimulating pulses that regulate the heart's rhythm -Causing the pacemaker to deliver the pulses irregularly -Causing the pacemaker to ignore the heart's own rhythm and deliver pulses at a fixed rate Like I said, this can have even FATAL impacts on the user. So now after all the reasons I have given about how cell phone radiation affects humans, you must be on my side by believing that cell phone radiation is not good for humans. My reasons were, that cell phone radiation can have an impact on brain cancer and tumours, it affects baby development, it affects sleep quality and interferes with pacemakers. These are my reasons why I STRONGLY believe that cell phone radiation is a big NO. Thank you :)

Title: Cell Phone Radiation is Safe for Humans Content: Yes, scientists might say that the radio frequency the user receives is not enough to cause any harm to them, but the average person uses their mobile phone for more than 5 hours per day. Think about how much radio frequency your body absorbs during those 5 hours! But it's not just that, majority of people sleep with their phones on their nightstand, turned on and receiving wifi, those are another minimum 7 hours of your body receiving more radio frequency plus carrying it around in your purse or pocket all day. Basically you could be with your phone for the whole 24 hours of a day. I derived this information from a reliable website. Even if you don't use a cell phone for hours each day, research by leading brain imaging researcher Nora D. Volkow, MD of the National Institutes of Health, revealed that after just 50 minutes of cell phone exposure, the emitted radiation increases brain cell activity in the region closest to the cell phone antenna. From: https://articles.mercola.com... We keep on hearing that cell phone radiation has NOTHING to do with brain tumours, cancers, etc. but people think and say this because the damage from cell phone exposure can take many years to surface. There are rarely any initial symptoms, taking for example smoking causing lung cancer, it takes about three to six months for most lung cancers to double their size. Therefore, it could take several years for a typical lung cancer to reach a size at which it could be diagnosed on a chest X-ray. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

Title: Cell Phone Radiation is Safe for Humans Content: That is like trying to overdose on weed. It will take around 100,000 puffs in less than a half an hour to be dangerous. The amounts are so small, no effects really is going to be done. I recieved this from an official website. "The only consistently recognized biological effect of radiofrequency energy is heating. The ability of microwave ovens to heat food is one example of this effect of radiofrequency energy. Radiofrequency exposure from cell phone use does cause heating to the area of the body where a cell phone or other device is held (ear, head, etc.). However, it is not sufficient to measurably increase body temperature, and there are no other clearly established effects on the body from radiofrequency energy. It has been suggested that radiofrequency energy might affect glucose metabolism, but two small studies that examined brain glucose metabolism after use of a cell phone showed inconsistent results. Whereas one study showed increased glucose metabolism in the region of the brain close to the antenna compared with tissues on the opposite side of the brain (2), the other study (3) found reduced glucose metabolism on the side of the brain where the phone was used. Another study investigated whether exposure to the radiofrequency energy from cell phones affects the flow of blood in the brain and found no evidence of such an effect (4). The authors of these studies noted that the results are preliminary and that possible health outcomes from changes in glucose metabolism are still unknown. Such inconsistent findings are not uncommon in experimental studies of the biological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (5). Some contributing factors include assumptions used to estimate doses, failure to consider temperature effects, and lack of blinding of investigators to exposure status." Source: https://www.cancer.gov...

Title: Cell Phone Radiation is Safe for Humans Content: Hello, I hope you have fun debating this topic with me!This first round is just about putting your idea forward and stating what you're going to be talking about, so it's basically an introduction. Don't comment any facts or data or your arguments in general. This is just to give an opinion about the topic then in rounds 2, 3 and 4 you can do your reasons.I strongly believe that cell phone radiation is not safe for humans of any age. So cell phone usage should be reduced.I hope you enjoy debating this important topic with me, future opponent, and may the debate begin!

Title: Cell Phone Radiation is Safe for Humans Content: Your whole entire argument on round 3 is based of that article. I'll be telling you why it's not enough information to support your claim. "I derived this information from a reliable website." Just saying that doesn't make it reliable. You have to look on more than one site, and the things you want to look for is ".org" or ".gov"! Anyone can just get a ".com", so you have to be careful. Your site is something I never heard of, and here is another site mentioning the study conducted, and why it isn't conclusive: "A recent small study in people has shown that cell phones may also have some other effects on the brain, although it"s not clear if they"re harmful. The study found that when people had an active cell phone held up to their ear for 50 minutes, brain tissues on the same side of the head as the phone used more glucose than did tissues on the other side of the brain. Glucose is a sugar that normally serves as the brain"s fuel. Glucose use goes up in certain parts of the brain when it is in use, such as when we are thinking, speaking, or moving. The possible health effect, if any, from the increase in glucose use from cell phone energy is unknown." https://www.cancer.org... Notice how it is a ".org" In one study that followed more than 420,000 cellphone users over a 20-year period, researchers found no evidence of a link between cellphones and brain tumors. Another study found an association between cellphones and cancer of the salivary glands. However, only a small number of study participants had malignant tumors. Another study suggested a possible increased risk of glioma " a specific type of brain tumor " for the heaviest cellphone users, but no increase in brain tumor risk overall." https://www.mayoclinic.org... It is also a ".org" Bring me more than an article. When official sites call out that study made and why it's not conclusive, your argument then becomes not conclusive.

Title: They can cause cancer Content: We all know that radiation is bad for us. Yet we fail to recognise the fact that mobile phones are using radiation in order to make contact with another station. Research has shown [[http://www.newsweek.com/id/80966]] that higher frequencies of radiation are given out by a phone the further away it is from a base station; those who live further away from these base station and use mobile phones are more likely to develop cancer. This research shows that cell phones are in fact not safe; they cause a disease which we are still very much in ignorance over how to cure.

Title: the increase personal safety Content: Whilst people may be focusing on the negative effects that radiation may or may not have, there is also the aspect of personal safety. People no longer have to find a phone booth to make an emergency call. People no longer have to have change on them to use that phone box. Mobile phones have saved thousands of lives. With most people having one, if you are out shopping and an accident occurs, you know that there will be many people around who within a matter of seconds would be able to call the police, an ambulance or a fireman depending on what the situation was. This is a speedier way to handle an emergency and the time saved will have already saved thousands of lives. This is compared to no recorded deaths for the radiation caused by mobile phones.

Title: should kid own phones with service Content: I will be arguing that children should not be allowed to possess phones with service. My opponent's first and only point regarded one's safety "in cases of emergencies or someone got hurt or sick or if you got lost or need help and stuff like that." However, one does not need a phone with service to contact the police department, 911. As part of the "Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999," all phones, with or without service, must be capable of calling 911 (S1).Studies suggest that cellphones are unhealthy for youths. They pose many healthy concerns which may impact them greatly in the future. For example, in a study published by the NRPB in December 2004, scientists found that there were indications that radiation from cellphones may damage DNA. A study from April 2004 shows a correlation between mobile phone use and auditory nerve tumors, and research in 2003 links cellphones to impaired brain function (S2). Scientists have concluded that cellphones may double a child's risk of getting a tumor on a nerve connecting your ear to your brain, damage cell membranes, radically decrease cellular production of energy and disrupt the communication between cells (S3). Cellphones are also a great deterrent of sleep. In a study of 10,000 16 to 19 year olds, researchers in Norway foudn that the longer a young person spent looking at an electronic screen before going to bed, the worse quality sleep they had. Those who spent more than four hours a day looking at screens had a 49% greater risk of taking longer than an hour to sleep and were 350% more likely to sleep for under five hours a night (S4). Being that sleep is crucial for youths, for physical and psychological development and for energy, many researchers discourage children from using cellphones.Sources:S1) https://www.fcc.gov...S2) https://www.newscientist.com...S3) http://articles.mercola.com...S4) http://www.independent.co.uk...

Title: They actually reduce the chances of brain tumours. Content: Quite the contrary to the suggestion that cell phones can cause harm to the brain via radiation, some research has shown the opposite to be true[[Joachim Schuz et al. "Cellular Telephone Use and Cancer Risk: Update of a Nationwide Danish Cohort," Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Dec. 2006]]. The radiation from mobile phones has been shown to reduce the chances of the user developing glioma and meningioma.

Title: Cell Phones Are Dangerous Content: \\\Cell phones are not dangerous because they are made of lint/// Most cell phones look like this: http://weblogs.cltv.com... as you can see the phone is made out of metal or shiny plastic, and not lint. \\\I would also like to point out my opponents cell phone does not exist./// This is irrelevant. It does exist because to post this argument I had to check on the mobile web to see if you had posted. ===Point=== I. Causes cancer * Cellular telephones emit radiofrequency (RF) energy (radio waves), which is a form of radiation that is under investigation for its effects on the human body (1). * Cellular telephone technology emerged in Europe in the 1980s but did not come into widespread use in the United States until the 1990s. The technology is rapidly changing, so there are few long-term studies of the effects of RF energy from cellular telephones on the human body (1). * The number of cellular telephone users has increased rapidly. As of December 2008, there were more than 270 million subscribers to cellular telephone service in the United States, according to the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association. This is an increase from 110 million users in 2000 and 208 million users in 2005. Because cell phones are held near the head when in use, therefore, in theory they may cause: Malignant (cancerous) brain tumors such as gliomas Non-cancerous tumors of the brain such as meningiomas Non-cancerous tumors of the nerve connecting the brain to the ear (acoustic neuromas) Non-cancerous tumors of the salivary glands

Title: children should not be given the permission to own mobile phones. Content: What you are saying about is cell phones related to humans.The topic is whether it is good for children.A child is a human between the stages of birth and puberty.The brain of a child is more prone to the bad effects of radiation.Please look these and confirm that they are very bad for children. http://healthychild.org... http://www.earthcalm.com... http://www.internationalparentingassociation.org... So from these websites we can confirm a fact that they are bad for children.The mobiles not only emit radiation during calls.A large amount of radiation is also emitted during the other activities by these cell phones.Children usually gets addicted to these and so the effect of these mobile phones in the children is maximum. So i urge the voters to be in the pro side in this debate. I am also thanking my con side for having a wonderful debate with me.........

Title: Should we use cell phones in school Content: There are possible long-term health risks from using mobile phones. Some research suggests that the radio waves from mobile phones may harm people's brains. Because children's brains are still developing, any possible damage to them is even more worrying than for adults. It is true there is no total scientific proof about this, but it is better to play safe than take risks – the precautionary principle. Until science can prove mobile phones are completely safe for young people to use, they should not be allowed to have them.

Title: Are cellphones safe Content: the increase personal safety

Title: Mobile phones are safe for children to use – we should ignore scare stories in the media. The lates... Content: There are possible long-term health risks from using mobile phones. Some research suggests that the radio waves from mobile phones may harm people’s brains. Because children’s brains are still developing, any possible damage to them is even more worrying than for adults. It is true there is no total scientific proof about this, but it is better to play safe than take risks – the precautionary principle. Until science can prove mobile phones are completely safe for young people to use, they should not be allowed to have them.

Title: cell phone use good or bad state your debate Content: Phones are useful in some cases, but they also can cause cancer from radiation. Here are some links: www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet http://www.cancer.org... http://www.nydailynews.com... www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/cell_phones._FAQ.html In my first argument, I will only be going over cancer. I apologize for this shortened argument, but I plan to use a different argument in every round. I look forward to your response.

Title: children should not be given the permission to own mobile phones. Content: My opponent provided no other definition of child. Therefore we must conclude that he agrees with me that nobody under 18 should own a cell phone or he has failed in his burden of proof. My opponent clearly did not examine my source. The National Cancer Institute is far more reliable than a YouTube video. However, I shall better explain it here. According to the NCI, cell phones emit "radiofrequency energy, a form of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation" [1] which, yes, may be absorbed by tissues near the ear. Now, ionizing radiation has been shown to increase the risk of cancer. Non-ionizing radiation, like phones, has not. Again, the NCI states that "radiofrequency energy...does not cause DNA damage in cells" and has not been found to "cause cancer in animals" or enhance cancer-causing effects [1]. Thus we cannot conclude cell phones cause cancer. PRO dropped my communication point; please extend it, and vote CON! [1] http://www.cancer.gov...

Title: The use of a mobile phone requires a social life. Content: Studies continue to emphatically expose the adverse effects of cell phone radiation; without refutation. [[http://www.truthaboutabs.com/cell-phone-damages-crotch.html]] Tell that to all those crack callers I keep getting missed calls from. Badgering strangers or not is possible on both the internet and on a mobile. The difference is privacy policies and Cyber-laws protect the average internet browser; whereas, there are no protections for those being harassed on their cellphone. And no I've tried the add to screen list option; the calls still come but the phone doesn't ring and calls I 'do' want to receive are impeded. all you need is a phone number; some creeps even dial in random numbers and then wait and see who picks up. Cell phones are even more versatile than public payphones for those who change Sims often; so they don't worry about call tracing. This is why cellphones are central to crime and terrorism. Demo: Get disposable phone; insert disposable Sim Call anyone from anywhere.(fellow criminals, stalker target, person to blackmail etc) Give phone to complete stranger or throw it in a trash bin; from which any random person can pick it up. Avoid being traced.

Title: children should not be given the permission to own mobile phones. Content: It is indeed a true fact that mobiles can cause cancers.When we place a mobile phone near a speaker and make a call to it we may be able to hear a specific sound.This is caused due to radiation..The radiation of the mobiles can pop a popcorn as shown in the following video. Now from this we have understood that mobiles causes radiation.Next is to know whether they are harmful or not to us.We can see that both pop corn and speakers get affected by this radiation.The same effect happens on human beings.The radiation can cause damage to the cells which are nearer to the mobiles while calling.This gets spread from cells to cells and finally will lead to a great effect in humans.If the students are given the permission to own mobiles they would go on calling and calling their friends.What the con said here was there is no problem in using phones.But it indeed has a great effect if children use it for long hours.So they are bad for children........

Title: Are cellphones safe Content: They can cause cancer

Title: mobile phones are a curse for todays youth Content: Mobile-phone use while driving is common. It is generally agreed that using a hand-held mobile phone while driving is a distraction that brings risk of road traffic accidents.A little attention is received recently towards the potential impact of the kind of electromagnetic fields generated by cellular phones on the human brain. Accumulating evidence indicate that microwave radiation from mobile phones may cause serious diseases and disturbances in the physiology. This includes an increased cancer risk and genetic damage, disturbed brain function and other effects. Mobile phone radiation and health concerns have been raised, especially following the enormous increase in the use of wireless mobile telephony throughout the world.

Title: This House believes that children should be allowed to own and use smart phones. Content: 1. Health an safety issues. A child's (say 5-13) brain absorbs 10x more radiation to the brain than adults. An older 'child' (15-18) may be more immune to radiation, but nevertheless, the 'child' will most likely sleep with the phone next to their heads, allowing 10 + or - hours of radiation streaming into the brain and genitalia, which could cause ADHD, autism, damaged reproduction systems, etc. 2. Distraction. You have already gone against this argument but let me expand. If the child took the phone to school, he would be focused on the phone and the new game he got rather than the teacher. His excuse would be "notes" or "the interactive textbook". And for older children, they would focus on the phones, instead of interacting with others. Most parent won't object to this, in today's culture. Exploring an smart phone not quite exploring technology. The creators of smart phones have made it extremely easy to navigate. Unless they were taking it apart, it's not really exploring technology. I believe there are alternatives to a technological education. One of the safest is a desktop, this also provides the parents with easier ways to make sure the child is doing what heshe is supposed to be doing. I suggest visiting this page for reasons why children should not have smartphones. It was also one of my sources. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Title: Are cellphones safe Content: They make people too reliant on them.

Title: Children Should not be Allowed to Own Smart Phones Until They are in Their Mid Teens (15-16 y/o) Content: "Radiations being at number one. When you are giving that innocent toddler a smart phone, you are actually giving him/her a radiation emitting box of terror." Are you not aware that many things in are every day life emit radiation? Processed foods, medical xrays and even air. If you walk outside in an urban environment you will soak in just as much radiation as you would being on your phone. Even are sun gives off MORE radiation than a cell phone, this argument is not concerning as the radiation a cell phone emits is VERY little in comparison to objects in our everyday lives. http://www.livescience.com... "Substituting physical activities and human interactions with smart phones would never do good" Bear in mind that a toddler is between the age of 0 and 5, and toddlers cannot participate in any official sport till the age of 6. Children will also by natural run around and play, the phone will not provide an obstacle for the children if the parents manage it properly. Children can also learn a lot from IPad applications, I work in the special needs department at my school and we give them phones/ipads to give them educational and brain games. This only helps there social interaction and makes them learn something new. "Most people, CAN NOT multitask. Switching between two tasks is something that takes up a lot of energy, especially when the task which needs to be switched from is an addiction" Procrastination can be controlled by the parent and its there responsibility to dictate phone time. Banning phone use will negate a lot of opportunities a lot of present day applications use. Education brain games can be crucial and can help a lot of developing kids, as technology if used properly will make people smarter. Books can be used yes, but googling can allow you to scroll through the information faster and become more multi perspective. http://www.usatoday.com... "The age 5 - 10 involves stuff like brain development, learning social skills, learning important values amongst family and friends, starting to know which field best matches with your interests " In the article above the school uses smart phones to help kids with brain stimulating activities, it can also provide benefits to many children as well, as it can help them learn a wider array of topics. Learning important values among family members and friends will come through social interaction. Regardless if you have a phone or not, you will be able to develop social skills as elementary schools will enforce it. Family values do not correlate to whether someone has a phone or not, I actually do not see how you can even find that compatible. Family values should be taught by the family members, and I was able to learn and adapt to my family's expectations even getting a phone at the age of 10. "AGE 10 - 15 ('Tweenagers') Apart from the health problems and lack in social skills, the problems which prevail more in this age group are things like increased 'FOMO' (Fear of missing out), sleep disruption, procrastination and increased stress (I had a smart phone for a week when I was in my 'tweens' and I gave it back myself, because I noticed, IN JUST ONE WEEK, how my life was being affected in a bad way from it!) " So you make the ignorant claim that you threw your phone out because of negative affects and it should be enforced on other individuals? Lets look at any device, a computer. If you're on the computer for to long, the same affects will develop. Being on the computer will disrupt sleep, make you procrastinate and increase your stress. However phones have also debunked my stress because I use it to communicate with friends, talk to family members from faraway lands and use it to learn. A flip phone will prevent you from communicating from long distance relatives as well, unless you want to pay extra money. So are you also saying that teenagers shouldn't have computers? "Moreover, these kids are more likely to be opened up to things they should not be watching or doing (pornography, etc.). " I don't know what household you grew up in, but by the age of 14 most parents have responded that it was okay for there children to watch pornography, unless you align yourself with a different religion. It actually has a lot of benefits and can help kids understand what it really is. You may be saying it puts them in a different mindset, but they will be brought into the mindset regardless as teenagers and their surroundings, if you truly dislike that mentality, send your kid to a private school. http://sexuality.about.com... In your last argument, I will state that a simple flip phone will be bad for business. No one wants to manufacture them and its a waste of money, all in all a cell phone an is unconstitutional and should be left by the parent. I will conclude there

Title: Mobile Tech Hurts more than Helps Content: Even though mobile technology has impacted humans lives in some positive ways, they have also caused many tragic situations that, if humanity wasn't addicted to their phones, could have been avoidable. For instance, texting/email/talking on your phone while driving are a major cause of accidents on the roads. 23% of all car accidents (that's almost 3.1 million crashes) are caused by responding to a text or email while driving, 11 teens are killed each day because of this and almost 3500 people died in 2012 because of distracted driving involving a cell phone or various other mobile technologies. Humanity has put so much faith and life into their phones that the younger you start with a cell phone the worst your addition to it will get, people find themselves checking their phone on average 2 times a minute. Teenagers who have lost or left their phone at home go through withdrawals that have the same stress level as a drug addict who haven't had a fix. Due to peoples addictions to their phones this can also increase risks of cancer from the radiation that the phones let off, always having your phone in your pocket can cause the radiation to be exposed to your leg or private regions for almost 14 hours a day.

Title: mobile phones are a curse for todays youth Content: "Mobile-phone use while driving is common. It is generally agreed that using a hand-held mobile phone while driving is a distraction that brings risk of road traffic accidents." -->Which if true, is the reason why many states and countries are implementing a hands-free rule when driving. Only blue tooth headsets will be allowed, to allow the driver to pay more attention to driving his/her car. ".A little attention is received recently towards the potential impact of the kind of electromagnetic fields generated by cellular phones on the human brain. Accumulating evidence indicate that microwave radiation from mobile phones may cause serious diseases and disturbances in the physiology. This includes an increased cancer risk and genetic damage, disturbed brain function and other effects. Mobile phone radiation and health concerns have been raised, especially following the enormous increase in the use of wireless mobile telephony throughout the world." --> A claim that is not backed up with a link or a reference to verify such a claim. As I have shown in my previous round, studies of up to 10 years show minimal to no cancer effects from cell phone usage. ~Conclusion~ No references and 3 forfeited rounds should obligate a vote for Con. My opponent has failed to show how cell phones are the curse for today's youth, and even dropped one of his points in the beginning.

Title: children should not be given the permission to own mobile phones. Content: Mobiles may help people to connect the people around the world.But the disadvantages or the defects of these mobile phones are much greater specially for kids.Using mobiles by kids for various purposes such as playing,chatting...etc. can cause much disaster in these children.This is because these mobiles give out radiations which can cause a great damage to our brain.This can even lead to cancers among the children.So to avoid this children should not be given their own phones until they reach a specific age.

Title: Children Should not be Allowed to Own Smart Phones Until They are in Their Mid Teens (15-16 y/o) Content: This round is ONLY for defence and conclusions.1)"Are you not aware that many things in are every day life emit radiation?"How many of those things do you carry with yourself which are constantly in contact with your body, with just some clothe layers in between? X rays are harmful for the body to some extent. Air won't have so much radiation, it will be basically negligible. The sun gives of way more radiation than a phone. Absolutely right. But all of that radiation doest not reach to us. It is a small fraction. And even that fraction does harm like SKIN CANCER if you spend too long in it, GUESS WHAT A DEVICE IN YOUR BREAST POCKET CONSTANTLY EMITING RADIATIONS BECAUSE IT HAS TO CONNECT TO THE TOWERS AND WIFI AND WHAT NOT WILL DO. 2) "toddlers cannot participate in any official sport till the age of 6" Physical development doesn't need 'official' games. It requires baby games like tickling the kid, exercising his body, etc. And why did you choose the age 6? Official means - "having the approval or authorization of an authority or public body" The games little kids play are not unofficial. They are not offending anyone by playing copycat with their parents. "Children will also by natural run around and play, the phone will not provide an obstacle for the children if the parents manage it properly" They won't sit all day with the phones. But something like a smart phone is addictive for a small kid. Who hasn't seen videos on youtube, of adorable babies playing on a smart phone, and when it is taken from them, they start crying. Brain development at childhood is not SUCH a big problem that something like a smart phone is needed to help. Babies' brains used to develop just as well when smart phones were not given away so carelessly to them, assuming that it is 'helping'.3) "Procrastination can be controlled by the parent and its there responsibility to dictate phone time."Easier said than done. When it comes to young teenagers, they can just sneak the smart phone out at night. Even if parents give a fixed time, it's hard for me to believe that more than 10% of those people at an age that humans tend to be the most stubborn at, will follow it. It is also not efficient for the parents to keep a check on the kid ALL the time since they have their own lives to deal with too.4) "Books can be used yes, but googling can allow you to scroll through the information faster and become more multi perspective."Know about the Google effect? The Google effect, also called digital amnesia, is the tendency to forget information that can be found readily online. According to the first study about the Google effect people are less likely to remember certain details they believe will be accessible online.Now this might sound okay-ish to you, but to me, it sounds pretty bad. It is just dampening, or more suitably, destroying the brain's capabilities. Your brain thinks, "I can look this up the internet without wasting much energy, no need to remember it then" And, a student should not be dealing with such a problem. It will interfere with performance at school. And even in their future, they might be in one of the vast list of jobs that require you to remember many things, from school, from recent affairs, etc. Looking it up the internet every time would be highly inefficient, the brain has to be trained to do good, not be lazy.5)Writing down to practice and reading from a book is the safest way to study. The apps are designed to help, not to be depended upon. 6)"So you make the ignorant claim that you threw your phone out because of negative affects and it should be enforced on other individuals?"Quoting an incident does not mean trying to enforce it on others according to my senses."Lets look at any device, a computer" " So are you also saying that teenagers shouldn't have computers?"If you read my rebuttals, you should know I already have talked why computers are better than phones and won't cause as much harm. It is quite easy to understand why spending (wasting) loads of time on a small lightweight phone is far easier than on a relatively large computer.7)"by the age of 14 most parents have responded that it was okay for there children to watch pornography"Okay this 'fact' is completely absurd. Everything from 'by the age of 14' to 'MOST parents' sounds a bit too farfetched. The source you mentioned speaks about effects of pornography on a couple. We are most definitely NOT talking about effects of porn on relationships here. Most parents would not want their kids to be watching such a thing, because - They are too naive and can get themselves into trouble. Once you are legal age, then you decide whether you want something like that, or stay a good 100 feet away. But we are talking about people less than 16 y/o.8)"I will state that a simple flip phone will be bad for business" The debate topic is whether children should be allowed smart phones or not, NOT how it affects business of the sellers.So, smartphones are bad for kids

Title: do smart phones make kids dumber Content: Last year the Librarian of Congress warned that texting was responsible for a drastic decline in American sentences, but that opinion wasn't backed up by any scientific evidence. Now, a team of Australian psychologists has come a step closer to proving that mobile phones are destroying our ability to think. The researchers show that children who use mobile phones respond to higher-level cognitive tasks faster, but less accurately, than those who don't. 94% of Australians use cell phones, and the cognitive psychologists were testing for the negative effects of exposure to mobile phone radiation, especially among children, whose brains are still developing. In addition to fears that cell phones cause cancer, one earlier study found that school-age children who had been exposed to mobile phones as infants or in utero were almost twice as likely to be hyperactive or disruptive as those whose parents used land lines. The good news is that radio waves from mobile phones won't fry young brains or turn kids into delinquents. The bad news is, cell phones actually make children dumb (M. J. Abramson, G. P. Benke, C. Dimitriadis, I. O. Inyang, M. R. Sim, R. S. Wolfe, and R. J. Croft, "Mobile telephone use is associated with changes in cognitive function in young adolescents" Bioelectromagnetics 30.6 [early view, August, 2009]). Of the 317 seventh-graders who participated in the Australian study, 77% owned their own mobile phone and almost all the rest had used one. The children reported an average of eight calls and eight text messages a week, with heavy users logging as many as fifteen. Even though these figures seem low -- what 13-year-old would acknowledge receiving so few texts? -- those who used cell phones more responded to a battery of cognitive tests much faster, and much less accurately, than those who seldom called or texted, or those who didn't use mobiles at all. Specifically, the psychologists found that as mobile phone use increased, children learned to perform tasks more quickly, but their ability to remember things declined: "The accuracy of working memory was poorer, reaction time for a simple learning task shorter, associative learning response time shorter and accuracy poorer." Findings were the same whether children called or texted, and since texting involves very little exposure to radiation, this suggests that it's the act of phoning, not the radiation, that accounts for decreased cognitive ability. The researchers went so far as to suggest that mobile phone use also correlates with impulsivity, and that cell phone utilities like 'predictive texting' actually condition children to favor speed over accuracy. (For other research on texting, click here and here; for the impact of texting on literature, click here; for its impact on politics, click here; for its impact on language development, click here). But reports that cell phones are destroying our brains are premature. Even the Australian researchers acknowledge that it might be unwise to depend on the accounts of thirteen year olds for accurate information about how many calls or texts they receive each week. Nor is it reasonable to conclude that mobile phones cause children to respond faster to assigned tasks (ever try to get a cell-phone-enabled thirteen year old to do their homework in a hurry?) or to make their answers less accurate (they can text perfectly without looking at the keyboard; can you?).

Title: Cell Phones Content: there bad

Title: children should not be given the permission to own mobile phones. Content: PRO claims that I am referring to humans. Is PRO claiming that children are not human? PRO provided no sources for his definition of child. Therefore my definition from Round 1 stands - a young person under age 18. Thus PRO'S argument must include anyone under 18. Again PRO ignored my argument concerning the necessity of phones in a digital age. He concedes them. My opponent provided links but did not support them with arguments. I reaffirm my position. The National Institute of Environmental Health Science states that there is no evidence to link "cell phone use with any adverse health problems" [1]. PRO also provided no proof that radiation is emitted by other activities. We can discount this claim. Even if the radiation was harmful, which I have proven there is no evidence to suggest, PRO is still arguing that no one under 18 should have a phone. I thank PRO for a great debate and urge you to vote CON! [1] http://www.niehs.nih.gov...

Title: Children Should not be Allowed to Own Smart Phones Until They are in Their Mid Teens (15-16 y/o) Content: "Smart phones have these options, correct. But there are no better substitutes? WRONG. " A smartphone will not intervene with a child playing a sport, a child will still go outside with his or her friends. As I said before, there are many applications that will help brain development, a special needs kid that has used these applications has shown major improvement in comparison to kids that don't. From personal experience I can conclude that a phone if used properly can actually help a child drastically. "Kids aged 5-10 don't need calculators. Using the brain to calculate is good for mental development. Calculators, not quite so." So if a child had a mental disability or dyslexia where they couldn't see the equations properly, you're saying that they shouldn't have additional tools available for them? Or a kid struggling, a calculator is a strong mathematical tool that gives every a broader range of what they're doing. If a kid is struggling a math the calculator is a vital tool for understanding. "Harm from radiation directly relates to time of exposure and distance from body." This radiation argument is completely untrue, as phones do emit radiation the power of the sun can burn the skin to the point where you do develop cancer. "Study guides. - Laptops exist for that," Which is contradictory, you're saying that phones are addicting, perhaps you should look at another addicting thing that correlates to laptops. Video games, how can you say a phone is addicting and ruins relationships when video games are considered to be a further concern. On a laptop you can access pornography as well, you say that kids shouldn't have phones and use laptops instead. When a laptop can literally do the same exact thing a phone could and also has a few more implements that are considered addictive, a kid going to school would also have the burden of carrying the laptop in there bag. Can you tell me something the phone can do that the laptop can't? If the answer strays away from "calling" and "texting" i'd be impressed. "That would be far better done if these kids were made to meet each other, and know each other by spending time in the real (NOT THE VIRTUAL) world." Most of the time calling and texting and communication through social media groups are a primary source for party invitations and event notification. I know when something is going on through a notified instagram group chat or a face book group message. Phones are generally used to allow a gateway for these social events, and allows a great way to communicate. Based on personal experience, I have had a friend who didn't have a smart phone, and we'd organize things through a group chat on a social media app. These made it so he wasn't notified and it only made him less open to future social organizations because he couldn't get to us. I could easily argue that I have been even more social because things that go on are more prevalent to me. "How does concentrating on the fun with friends during an outing, instead of constantly gazing into the screen make you introvert? Its the opposite for sure though. " However most of the time people go through there phone when they are in a bus or car, or in an environment when they are bored. In a date they may do it on occasion, but introversion is on the basis of not wanting to talk to people. Smart phones notify people of what is going on. In a study conducted it actually stated that extroverts are more likely to become addicted to there smart phones. http://www.rawstory.com... It's due to them actually being socially active, a student who is introverted cannot nor do they want to communicate with a broad group of people. You may be misinformed as well, it's nice to concentrate on friends during an outing, but most people don't whip out there phones and just browse through it when they are with a group of friends. Unless they are sitting down, but they may also be posting something on snapchat or instagram where they can share there experience with everyone else. And if someone wants to browse there phone and be an introvert, so what? It may give them a release from the real world and get there minds off of things. "Invitations don't inculcate social skills. Most of these kids won't even go due to the fear of being judged for what they are outside the online world. Even if they go, they are most likely to take the phone with them and spend more time on it." If they spend time on there phone then that is entirely okay, as its a good way to escape from an awkward situation. But as I said many times before, it's a way to open gateways to be more social. Most kids who are extroverted WILL pick up to social invitations. In conclusion, kids who do not have phones will be more secluded. It's healthy to develop social skills but phones won't intervene with that. Group chats will notify gateways, where kids can be more social and happy.

Title: Cell Phones Are Dangerous Content: This debate gave me hepatitis

Title: Are cellphones safe Content: People succumb to their mobile and drive whilst on the phone

Title: Mobile phones are safe for children to use – we should ignore scare stories in the media. The lates... Content: Mobile phones are safe for children to use – we should ignore scare stories in the media. The latest research says that mobile phones do not damage brain cells. Even those earlier studies that suggested there might be a problem thought that people would have to use a cell phone for hours a day for there to be an effect. It is true that there is no 100% proof mobile phones are safe to use, but that is true of any scientific study.

Title: Cell Phones Are Dangerous Content: Cell phones are not dangerous because they are made of lint.. therefore they are of no harm to anyone.. I would also like to point out my opponents cell phone does not exist.

Title: Are cellphones safe Content: They actually reduce the chances of brain tumours.

Title: Go Nuclear Content: Nuclear reactors are very dangerous and threaten the safety of human lives. Radiation caused by the nuclear reactors there are two. First, direct radiation, which occurs when the radiation emitted by radioactive directly on the skin or the human body. Second, indirect radiation. Indirect radiation is radiation that occurs through contaminated food and drink radioactive substances, either through air, water, or other media. Both the radiation directly or indirectly, will affect organ function through cell-cell formation. Organs that are sensitive to and become damaged. Cells of the body when contaminated radioactive description as follows: the occurrence of ionizing radiation can damage the relationship between the atomic cell with molecules of life, can also alter the condition of the atom itself, alter the original function of the cell or even to kill him. In principle, there are three due to radiation can affect cells. First, the cell will die. Second, there was a doubling of the cell, can eventually lead to cancer, and the third, damage can occur in the egg or testes, which will start the process of deformed babies. In addition, also cause burns and an increasing number of cancer patients (thyroid and cardiovascular) as much as 30-50% in Hryvnia, respiratory inflammation, and inhibition of the respiratory tract, as well as psychological problems and stress resulting from radiation leaks. There are some latent dangers of nuclear power plants that need to be considered. First, human error (human error) which may cause leakage, which is a very broad range of radiation and be fatal for the environment and living things. Secondly, one of which is generated by nuclear power plants, namely Plutonium has a very powerful warhead. Plutonium Because of this, one of the raw material for making nuclear weapons. Hiroshima city destroyed simply by 5 kg of plutonium. Third, the waste generated (Uranium) can affect genetics. In addition, nuclear power emits radioactive radiation that are dangerous to humans. THINK IT OVER! NUCLEAR REACTOR IS HARMFUL!

Title: Should students use phones in school Content: Did u know wifi is actually a form of radiation? The wifi waves are electro-magnetic and a study published by Princeton university shows that they actually can be harmful to children. Yes children with disabilities can benefit from specific programs but why do they need their own personal devices to do so? Technology is very important in the modern day but schools need to find a way to balance between traditional schooling while keeping up with our rapidly changing world. BYOD isn't the way.

Title: Are cellphones safe Content: the link between phone usage and brain tumours has been disproved

Title: This House believes that children should be allowed to own and use smart phones. Content: I believe that children should not own smartphones because of the huge amount of radiation constantly 'penetrating' , the word my opponent would prefer me to use, the brain and other fragile body parts, and because most parents do not mind when and what their children use their phones for, and to those parents who do, I comend you.

Title: children should not be given the permission to own mobile phones. Content: I'd like to welcome my opponent and extend my hope for a great debate! The Merriam-Webster Dictionary vaguely defines 'child' as "a young person" or "a person not yet of age" [1]. In the United States, 'of age' generally refers to age 18, so my opponent is arguing against anyone younger than 18 having a cell phone. It is his burden of proof to provide a specific age for usage. He claims that phones cause radiation leading to cancer. However, as the National Cancer Institute reports, "studies...have not shown a consistent link between cell phone use and cancers of the brain, nerves" and more [2]. Thus my opponent's claim is false. Cell phone use connects children to their friends and families. They are sources of communication and entertainment and, in this technological era, are essential. Thus I must urge you to vote CON in this debate! [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] http://www.cancer.gov...

Title: Schools Should Allow The Owning And Usage Of Mobile Phones. Content: I shall prove my position by defending my arguments about how schools should allow the usage of mobile phones. Definition: A mobile phone (also known as a cellular phone, cell phone, and a hand phone) is a device that can make and receive telephone calls over a radio link while moving around a wide geographic area. It does so by connecting to a cellular network provided by a mobile phone operator, allowing access to the public telephone network. By contrast, a cordless telephone is used only within the short range of a single, private base station. Reasons: My reasons why mobile phones should be bannes will be listed below: Reason 1: Mobile Phones keep children safe. If any sign of emergency, the children may be allowed to use their mobile phones to contact 911 or their parents. If their school teaches fire drills, earthquake drills, and others, they might be in a situation in which their school is being raided, or is in the proccess of a shooting, they may also be able to contact 911 or anyone of their relatives. Reason 2: Mobile phones encourage the development of independence and interpersonal skills.Education is as much about the growth in character and dealing with risks as it is the accumulation of knowledge; mobile phones provide for children a means to converse with peers, develop friendships and resolve disputes, all within minutes of each other, night and day. For them, ‘getting a cell phone is a step towards independence and a status symbol among their friends’.[1] The confidence and self-esteem derived from having a mobile phone cannot be underappreciated, as proven by the corresponding negative impact of losing one’s phone. An Independent study in 2004 found that 55 per cent of people cited ‘keeping in touch with friends or family as the main reason for being wedded to their handsets'.[2] Furthermore, the increasing potential of smart phones facilitates the accessing of information in real-time and on the move; a determined child with a grasp of the potential of their mobile phone can illuminate themselves on matters like directions to destinations, opening times for activities and immediate weather forecasts. With such information, children can begin to reason with each other and make decisions without resort to more mature advice. Conclusion: My arguments declare all the reason why mobile phones should be allowed in public schools. I rest my case.

Title: Using a mobile phone while driving is very dangerous. Physically holding a handset removes one hand... Content: Clearly, using a mobile phone while driving can be dangerous in some circumstances, but equally it is not dangerous in many situations, for example while the car is at a standstill in gridlocked traffic, while waiting at traffic lights, or on a quiet road with good visibility ahead. Other things in the car can be at least as distracting, such as eating, changing tapes, retuning the radio, arguing with your spouse about directions, trying to stop children squabbling, etc. We should not introduce a law that victimises mobile phone users under all conditions, while ignoring many other causes of accidents.

Title: Should we use cell phones in school Content: Mobile phones make children less safe. Firstly they are carrying an expensive fashion item that makes them a target for criminals. Millions of people are robbed of cell phones every year, sometimes with violence. Secondly, many children spend so much time talking on the phone or texting that they are less aware of what is going on around them. Each year young people get run over crossing the street because their attention was on their phone conversation, not the traffic.

Title: Cell phone use in cars probably saves lives Content: Using mobiles on the road could improve safety, for example, by allowing delayed employees to ring in to the office rather than drive recklessly in an effort to arrive more promptly. Drivers now often use mobile phones to report accidents to the emergency services, and alert the police to dangerous driving, stray animals, unsafe loads, etc.

Title: Hands Free Phones Are not Dangerous Content: Hands-free cell phones are sufficiently safe on the road. These allow drivers to communicate freely without taking their hands off the controls or their eyes off the road. Effectively there is no difference between talking to someone on a hands-free mobile, and holding a conversation with a passenger next to you; in fact, the latter is more dangerous as you may be tempted to turn your head to directly address the passenger. Further, allowing the use of hands free sets has been shown to reduce fatalities, especially in adverse weather conditions through drivers being able to report their status to their loved ones and the local authorities should things become too difficult for them to handle.[1] [1] Stuckey, Mike. “Hands-free phones are lifesavers, study says.” MSNBC. 13/5/2008 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24580099/#.TtwFTfJVO90

Title: Children should have mobile phones Content: First of all i have not been able to reply previous entries but i will try to debate previous points. "Mobile phones helps children to stay in contact with their parents" I hope that reduces epidemic obesity, aggression, addiction, strong emission of radiation, sleep deprivation and digital dementia. But yeah i guess you've got a point in there. "Mobile phones help children have an emergency way to contact people in cases of emergencies" Kids usually use their mobile phones to prank and/or call 911 for weird and foolish reasons. One thing in special, "swatting" became trendy lately and consists of calling 911 to call a swat team to another child house to ruin the game session of said child. Makenna Sewell called 911 to kill a 2-inch spider, clearly not an emergency. 10-year-old Dan David called because he did not wanted to sleep, sounds like a emergency doesn't it? The list goes on and on. "Mobile phones reduce kidnappings" They may reduce kidnappings or may not reduce kidnappings im not sure, and can't really tell hence your lack of sources but cell phones do increase general crime and tragedy. Street road accidents because of children using the cellphone while walking on the street. Stealing of wealthy cellphones that if the children resists usually end in murder or violence. Identity thefts also. What about false kidnappings? In Spain some false kidnappers ask children their phone numbers, name and details before a movie and proceed to call their parents for money from their devices to simulate a kidnappings and ask for huge amounts of money, this problem has grown a lot lately not only in Spain but America as well. A point i will also encourage the voters to investigate (Im almost out of characters):http://alturl.com... Sources: www.mom.me/home/10077-kids-who-called-911-crazy-things/ www.science.opposingviews.com/impact-cell-phones-crime-1784.html www.huffingtonpost.com/cris-rowan/10-reasons-why-handheld-devices-should-be-banned_b_4899218.html

Title: This House believes that children should be allowed to own and use smart phones. Content: So we've reached the end of our debate. Clearly there are speculations and concerns issued by many incuding parents, teachers, peadriticians and scientists in regards to our motion. I however still am subscribing to the belief that that the advantages for children to own smart phones outweigh the minor disadvantages that come with it. To sum up, my three points that have been taken into account of our debate are to promote the intellectual development of children ,parallel to The Children's Right, economic and financial reasons and lastly to assimilate the element of latest technology among children to mould technology-savvy generation. Now for my opponent, I am well aware of the fragility of children's biology and how they can be obsessed with smart phones. That's why I did mention parents' role in this matter earlier. They should always control the internet and calls usage by their children. Parents should always remind their children of the danger of phones-oriented radiation to them and make sure that at night when they are sleeping their smart phones are placed at a safe distance. Besides that, if inability to stay focus in class becomes a problem, simple , parents should take away their phones and keep them during school hours return to them after school. In a nutshell, parents should allow their children to own a smart phone. Bear in mind that everything if used excessively can be dangerous and that applies to this situation. With enough control and support by parents, I believe that children can benefit the best from having this wonderful piece of technology! That's all from me, thank you for your time! I really appreciate it. Ps: to con, radiation doesn't "'flow""' in blood vein. It penetrates through your clothes and if powerful enough ( with strong penetrating power) through your skin.

Title: Society can't "trust judgement" of drivers with cell phones Content: "Editorial: Cellphone ban long overdue". The Dominion Post. June 12th, 2008 - "Driving while using cellphones reduces safety margins. Those who assert they know the difference between safe and unsafe use of phones should ask themselves if they are equally confident that the testosterone-loaded 18-year-old rushing from football practice to meet his girlfriend will show the same good judgment when his phone beeps as he approaches in the opposite direction."

Title: Mobile phones make sure that we are safe Content: Mobile phones mean we are never out of contact with our friends, parents, guardians, or if necessary our school. They provide a way we can quickly contact someone if we are in trouble or are lost. Mobiles are most clearly helpful if caught in a large scale disaster such as a flood or earthquake as we can tell rescuers where we are. But they are also helpful for every day security. With a mobile phone parents know where we are and can be quickly contacted if we feel unsafe somewhere.

Title: Hands-free cell phones are sufficiently safe on the road. Content: These allow drivers to communicate freely without taking their hands off the controls or their eyes off the road. Effectively there is no difference between talking to someone on a hands-free mobile, and holding a conversation with a passenger next to you; in fact, the latter is more dangerous as you may be tempted to turn your head to directly address the passenger.

Title: Cell phones do more harm than good in society and schools today Content: Yes I completely agree, It is VERY rude to be on the phone when talking to somebody in front of you. I do believe that phones make lives easier, Such as communicating with family and in dangerous situations. Without phones, Many many people would be dead due to the amount of calls to 999 /911 /ect. It would also be quite problematic if you couldn't get a ride or where not with someone

Title: The internet does more harm than good. Content: The internet does more harm than good .Do you agree? The internet has done more harm than good. In today"s modern society, using internet to access to our social media is a very common thing. As in our daily life, once we wake up what we do is looking for our phone. After we go on to the bed, the last thing we do is also scrolling on our phone. Despite having a bed time story, we intend to immerse in the social media world. A group of experts have proven that 90% of people have a smart phone to access to social media. Using phone will release radiation which will affect our health, it also occupies most of our time to spend with our family members.

Title: Cell Phones are worse than other distractions Content: Cell phones in cars, unlike a variety of other distractions, can be regulated easily. They are an object which can easily be identified, and with phone bills it is possible to find out if a person is lying when they are caught for using cell phones in cars. As such the fact that other distractions exist, even if they are as harmful as cellphones, is no reason to not to ban their use. Further, other sources of potential distraction, such as passengers or car radios, may provide a net gain in utility to road users and other stakeholders in mass transit systems. Being able to carry multiple people in cars for example helps society through a reduction in carbon emissions as well as simply through a reduction in traffic. To take this argument further, there are many people who cannot drive but require use of cars. For example, children might require their parents to drive them to school. Car radios are somewhat more controversial and principally if they prove to be as bad a distraction as a mobile phone then proposition would have no problem with banning them. However, things such as news and traffic updates are probably more useful to a driver than the use of mobile phones. Whilst they may be distracting, given the huge benefit they cause for society it is legitimate for them to be allowed. Even if the benefit that they confer is the same as that of phones however, it is legitimate within our mechanism that we would ban them as well if required.[1] [1] “Editorial: Cellphone ban long overdue.” The Dominion Post. 12/06/2008 http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/editorials/484395

Title: Mobile phones keep children safer, as it is easier for parents to stay in touch with their children.... Content: Mobile phones make children less safe. Firstly they are carrying an expensive fashion item that makes them a target for criminals. Millions of people are robbed of cell phones every year, sometimes with violence. Secondly, many children spend so much time talking on the phone or texting that they are less aware of what is going on around them. Each year young people get run over crossing the street because their attention was on their phone conversation, not the traffic.

Title: Children Should not be Allowed to Own Smart Phones Until They are in Their Mid Teens (15-16 y/o) Content: I start my argument. Best of luck to my respectable opponent :)Health HazardsIn today's times, many parents give even their toddlers tablets and smart phones to play with. Now how could these young ones be expected not to be addicted to something even a mature adult gets addicted to? "An interesting experiment conducted by researchers at the Center for Toddler Development at Barnard College, showed that children between 18 to 36 months old, when given an iPad to play with, were so absorbed, that they did not respond to their names." Smart phones cause addiction at any age, the difference lies in the level of maturity of the person. Now the person might become mature at an age earlier than 15, or not become mentally mature even after crossing 20, but the age 15-16 years has been selected by me as an average for when most people tend to become more responsible, i.e. more mature. AGE 0-5 y/o (toddlers and young kids (brain is in developing phase))If smart phones become an addiction at an early age, they do more harm than good. Radiations being at number one. When you are giving that innocent toddler a smart phone, you are actually giving him/her a radiation emitting box of terror. A child's brain tissues are more absorbent than an adult's, meaning that the radiations will do more harm to the young kids. Bone marrow of an average child absorbs 10X more radiation than an adult's. And as anyone would know, radiations come with a chance of causing diseases such as cancer.Brain development is negatively affected.Substituting physical activities and human interactions with smart phones would never do good, according to the common sense of a sane person. The young kids' brains are developing, they will obviously develop better if they face the physical world themselves, by using their own senses.The counter argument for this is that their are educational games for the kids, but the use of mobile devices in particular online games should support imaginative play instead of trying to use them as a way to keep children busy, which is normally the case.AGE 5-10 y/o ( young students)Hindrance to concentration and focus.Most people, CAN NOT multitask. Switching between two tasks is something that takes up a lot of energy, especially when the task which needs to be switched from is an addiction. A simple 'ding' for a message can and does shift focus of people (more of kids than adults). An average kid will, after checking the message, engage in online chats, games, etc. for the so called '5 minutes'(which ultimately turn out to be hours) before they realise they have not completed the project they had to submit the next day or did not study for the big test the next day. Though, the only difference this causes is that now they kill time by chatting and playing the games while stressing about what will happen the next day, instead of killing time with a calm mind which they were doing earlier.Reduced social skills and face to face interaction.Have you ever read about people who do terrible in interviews and get rejected? Funny stories, eh? This happens mainly because of lack of social skills. And guess what smart phones help in building ? THE LACK OF SOCIAL SKILLS.The age 5 - 10 involves stuff like brain development, learning social skills, learning important values amongst family and friends, starting to know which field best matches with your interests (Do you love learning? Are you good in athletics? Are you an all rounder?) And again guess what smart phones do? STOP ALL OF THIS IMPORTANT BUSINESS FROM HAPPENING IN THE NATURAL WAY!AGE 10 - 15 ('Tweenagers') Apart from the health problems and lack in social skills, the problems which prevail more in this age group are things like increased 'FOMO' (Fear of missing out), sleep disruption, procrastination and increased stress (I had a smart phone for a week when I was in my 'tweens' and I gave it back myself, because I noticed, IN JUST ONE WEEK, how my life was being affected in a bad way from it!) The tweenagers have hormonal changes taking place in them. They are naturally more irritable and irrational. Sleeplessness, procrastination, stress DOES NOT help, believe me, rather, these just help to make them more irritable. Moreover, these kids are more likely to be opened up to things they should not be watching or doing (pornography, etc.). They thus waste an important part of life on worthless activities. Now, the reason most kids get smart phones is because of safety reasons, to be always connected with the parents. But a simple cell phone does exactly the same, help ensure safety without a myriad of disadvantages which a smart phone poses. Till the age of 15 though, most people have developed to become responsible and have the important values hard wired within. Now they are ready to handle the otherwise 'poisoned chalice' to gain more advantages than the inevitable disadvantages. *SOURCES WILL BE MENTIONED IN LAST ROUND*

Title: Should cell phones be permitted in school Content: No. Cell phones are a big distraction during school hours. Yes, they could be used in dangerous scenarios, but most students can leave them classroom if they feel threatened. It is very easy to come up with an excuse to leave. For the music aspect, yes students benefit from it. I am in a debate about it right now even. But some schools don't allow any music at all during the school day. The teachers believe that the music distracts them. Some teachers also allow music to be played from their computer or classroom radio. Students can learn much more from their textbook than they can from their phone or tablet. My school has laptops for each student to carry around and take home to use for homework. A lot of the teachers use the system 'Angel' for homework and notes. So, the only time we can get our laptop out at school is to get an assignment from there. In conclusion, cell phones should not be permitted in schools. They are a big distraction to the students while they are supposed to be learning.

Title: Radiation around nuclear plants is well within safe limits Content: Mark Brandly. "The Case for Nuclear Power". Virginia Viewpoint. October, 2001: "Nuclear plants release no gaseous pollutants and the amount of radioactivity is miniscule. Those living near a nuclear plant face less radioactivity per capita than is encountered in many normal daily activities."

Title: cell phones should be allowed in school Content: Also, I never meant that students shouldn't be able to have them in school, I meant that students shouldn't be able to use them during the class. Well first of all, my opponent admitted that cell phones do have a tendency to distract and annoy other students in the classroom. And yes, they can be used for safety; after class. I'm pretty sure students are nice and safe in the classroom. Now, this is under certain circumstances. I don't think that a student is going to get in trouble for using their phone if they got mugged. Now I know there are some of us who will follow the rules, but lets face it, most students will abuse the power of being able to use their phone in class, whether it be for orginazation, internet access, or just recording lectures. They will look at videos, text, take videos or pictures, but most of all not learn or pay attention. As to the matter of phones saving the environment, one tree makes about 80,500 sheets of paper, so that one 90 sheet notebook that you would use to take notes doesn't really make an impact on the "environmental deficit ". Furthermore, my opponent said that cellphones can help students take notes. My opponent stated that "every penny counts in these tough economic times. " Well lets see, an average "smartphone", as my opponent said, costs anywhere from $200-$500, plus the plan and contract, another $100, which overall is about $400 as compared to a notebook and mechanical pencil for ohh, about $3.99 altogether. Okay, my opponent said that using the internet during class can help them not miss parts of the lecture. Now to me this doesn't make sense. How can you be looking up a "big word" and still be attently listening to your proffessor? Now, some phones do provide internet access. I do not know if this subject in the debate is a good thing or bad thing because it has the potential to be a bad thing, so my opponent can't use this as an argument because this can be a good or a bad thing depending on the student using the Internet. Okay now to the calculator. The thing with the calculator is that not everybody will need a calculator for their class(es). If your teacher gives you a problem, I'm pretty sure that they want to see if you know the material, not your calculator. So I dont know about you, but to me it seems like common sense that con is the victor. I have disproved all of his statements and believe that you will make the right choice when it comes to the victor of this debate.

Title: Cell Phones Are Dangerous Content: Resolved that cell phones are dangerous. Please state points why cell phones are not dangerous.

Title: Cell phones should only be used while driving in dire situations Content: US National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration: "Drivers should make every effort to pull over in a safe stopping point before using their telephones. In an emergency, drivers should use their best judgement about whether or not to use their telephones."

Title: Cell Phones are worse than other distractions Content: Many other things such as radios within cars are just as distracting as mobile phones. Although it is easy for police and prosecutors to prove that a mobile phone was in use during a particular period of time, it is difficult to monitor the use of mobile phones in most situations. Enforcing a ban on mobiles would be as impractical as a ban on arguing with a spouse. Further, the point of the ban on mobile phones is to minimise distractions. However, a simple ban on mobile phones is likely to create a false sense of security among road users. Objects similar to cell phones are not subject to bans, despite the fact that they might be distracting as well. For example, a tablet PC in the passenger seat would not be under this ban, but could easily be as distracting. This false sense of security could practically cause drivers to be less conscious of distractions and thus hurt in the long run. Whilst the law might incorporate these bans into the system, the prevalent message that will get to the people will typically be centred on a mobile phone ban. This is because mobile phones are the single most prevalent item that would be banned under the proposition. As such, even though the law covers all distracting goods, it might still breed complacency in people, causing them to ignore other items in the car that might be distracting and assume that they are legitimate.[1] [1] Tetlock, Paul. Burnett, Jason. Hahn, Robert. “Ban Cell phones In Cars?” Cato.org 29/12/2000 http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4414

Title: Should childrens have cellphones Content: Your counterargument is safety. I don't think you bought an expensive phone thinking about "safety". You bought it for fun. If you ask someone between 9-16 years old, they most likely won't even know the alarm number in most countries. Also, if you are kidnapped/being forced to do something/attacked you won't have the time to call. Most likely they'll take your cellphone. More and more, people are even robbed BECAUSE they have such expensive phones. The only advantage situation of having such mobile computer is when 1) you're completely lost and need help, and 2) you're always available when someone needs you. I believe children are capable of avoiding such situations and shouldn't need to have a cellphone (let alone a super expensive one!) just for these 2 situations! This is already the end of this debate. I would like to conclude by thanking Nadine for her interesting topic choice!

Title: cell phone being banned while driving Content: "I believe that cell phones should be banned while driving because it poses a threat to other drivers. " Last time I checked, cell phones do not pose threats to other drivers. They are merely electronic devices. "Cell phones often cause accidents. " No, they don't. "Cell phones are a bigger threat of a distraction then radios are. " Prove it. Thank you.

Title: Mobile phones keep children safer, as it is easier for parents to stay in touch with their children.... Content: Mobile phones keep children safer, as it is easier for parents to stay in touch with their children. Through calls and texts, parents can know where their child is and be reassured that he or she is safe. And in an emergency, young people can summon help quickly.\ Yes, some children carrying phones have been robbed, but thieves are always after something new. Phones now are both much more widespread and security coded, so there is little point in stealing them. If security is your concern, ban the latest personal MP3 and DVD players instead. Traffic accidents should be blamed on bad safety education rather than phones.\

Title: Cell Phones Does More Harm Than Good Content: Cell Phones are destroying society now a days. When i walk around out in public all i see is kids, adults, etc. with their eyes glued to their phones, today you can't even hold a civil conversation with someone anymore which is dangerous to your health actually Cell Phones can affect your brain activity, for example talking on the phone with another person simply holding a phone to your ear for a extended amount of time increases activity in regions of the brain closest to the antenna. Researchers have found that Glucose metabolism in the orbitofrontal cortex and temporal pole increased significantly when the phone was turned on and muted, compared with when it was off (P=0.004). This may be a acute affect but it contributes to reasons of why they are harmful. Social life, i enjoy being able to talk to someone face to face for others it may be different but studies show that social media is causing anxiety Forty-five percent of responders said they feel "worried or uncomfortable" when email and Facebook are inaccessible, while 60 percent of respondents stated "they felt the need to switch off" their phones and computers to secure a full-fledged break from technology. In other words, it's not being on social networks that makes people anxious. It's being away from them. This can cause to depression and other issues. Which is very harmful for a person.

Title: Cellphone is very useful nowadays.. Content: I chose this subject especially because it will prove more of a challenge. That being said I hope for this to be a fun and educational debate. ====================== When you say "our country" you are really referring to the United States aren't you? For the sake of the debate I will assume that you are. If not then you may correct me in further posts. Now when you mention the financial crisis I will also assume that your debate will revolve around the importance of phones during a crisis in America. Since you are being vague I can only base my arguments on assumptions. ====================== The usefulness of a regular cell phone is about as equivalent to the internet which I consider to be a healthier alternative, seeing as how you can't really take the computer with you while you are traveling. I believe that no citation is needed for this claim. Cell phones are an addiction, but they are always looked past and people don't consider then to be too dangerous. With my future arguments I will stress on this fact with examples and references. I will keep this very brief as to let you make it clearer what we are ‘actually' debating about.

Title: People should not be so addicted to their cell phones. Content: "Also, people can take their phones with them on cars, but it should certainly not be used, as it is illegal and a very dangerous movement." Con Yeah, but if you watch An inconvenient tooth by Al Gore you will learn that one of the causes of Global Climate change is overpopulation. The dangerous situation that cellphones create in cars is good for the environment.

Title: Hands Free Phones Are not Dangerous Content: Conversations of any kind (with or without the involvement of the hands) impair concentration and reactions in braking tests. For some reason the brain treats a telephone conversation differently from talking to a passenger, perhaps because the passenger is also aware of possible road hazards in a way the telephone caller cannot be and so makes less demands upon the driver in terms of concentration at critical moments. In any case, voice activated technology is often unreliable, risking drivers trying to use it getting frustrated and losing concentration. It would be inconsistent to ban one sort of mobile phone while allowing the other sort, which can be just as lethal. Therefore, hands-free mobile phone use while driving should also be banned. Further, "Some researchers, in fact, fear that the new law may cause more traffic accidents, not fewer, because they envision more distractions for many motorists. When ring tones chime and drivers scramble to find their newly purchased headsets -- or, alternatively, scan the roadsides for police enforcing the new ban -- their attention, already stretched, will be further taxed.[1] [1] Healy, Melissa. “Hands-Free cellphone use while driving won’t make the roads safe, studies show. Why? Brain Overload.” 30/06/2008 http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-cells30-2008jun30,0,3192911.story

Title: Enforcing a vehicle cell phone ban is nearly impossible Content: This is especially true of hands-free phones, where accused motorists could simply claim to be singing along to the radio or talking to themselves. In any case, the widespread introduction of speed cameras in many countries, and an increased public fear of violent crime have led to the redeployment of the traffic police who would be needed to enforce such laws.

Title: Banning cell phones in cars Content: Hands-free cell phones are sufficiently safe on the road.

Title: Should you be allowed to bring your phone to school Content: I agree that you can bring your phone only for emergency uses and if your teachers ask you to bring them. But I don't like your idea of our phone replacing books as school material. You can easily tab out of your lesson and check some other app which I doubt most of the students in the world would do if phones were allowed in school. Also a large majority of people in the world use glasses to enhance their vision, phones as school material would degrade their eyesight more due to the radiation caused by these devices. Now if your asking me how it would their degrade their eyes when they can just move the phone a few inches away from their eyes, I've met a lot of people who wear glasses when even with glasses they still can't seen the closes thing near them. They can also use that for research but I doubt other students will be able to see what they've researched and they can always just write them down. Also, not everyone in the world has a phone. My conclusion is that phones will not help school but degrade it even more. Would you imagine a whole class having the freedom of using their phones in their class? No one listen to the teacher.

Title: Mobile phones make sure that we are safe Content: Phones are certainly a useful tool in helping to keep in contact so can be useful if you get into trouble. But they don’t always help because they don’t always keep us in contact. There are many reasons why a mobile may be useless. There may be no signal. Or the phone may have been turned off. Or the battery may have run low. If any of these things happen then it adds to parents worries as they can’t get in contact when they expected to be able to.

Title: Are cellphones safe Content: lower sperm count

Title: It should be illegal for people to use cell phones while driving Content: Ok here are my arguments: 1. Drivers who use cell phones are four times more likely to be in a crash. 2. Cell phone use contributes to an estimated 6 percent of all crashes, which equates to 636,000 crashes, 330,000 injuries, 12,000 serious injuries and 2,600 deaths each year. 3. 80 percent of crashes are related to driver inattention, and the #1 source of driver inattention is cell phones. 4. The annual cost of crashes caused by cell phone use is estimated to be $43 billion. 5. 5 states have already prohibited drivers from talking on cell phones while driving (California, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Washington). 6.Driving while using a cell phone is as dangerous if not more dangerous than driving intoxicated. Using a cell phone while driving poses an imminent threat not only to the person using it, but also other drivers as well, and that is why a federal law should be made. 1.1997 New England Journal of Medicine examination of hospital records and 2005 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety study linking crashes to cell phone records 2.Harvard Center of Risk Analysis 3.Virginia Tech 100-car study for NHTSA 4.Harvard Center for Risk Analysis 5.http://www.statehighwaysafety.org... 6.http://news.cnet.com...

Title: Nuclear energy Content: Radiation around nuclear plants is well within safe limits

Title: the increase personal safety Content: There have been deaths recorded which were solely or mostly caused by mobile phones; mugging. Criminals have been given a new way to make money and they abuse it. Everyone has a mobile phone; therefore everyone has something worth stealing. Many people have died through being mugged and not giving up their mobile phone. By having a mobile phone then, you actually decrease your personal safety by turning yourself into a target of crime.

Title: Cell phones in school Content: Cell Phones Improve School Safety Supporters of cell phones in school contend that cell phones improve student safety by allowing students to contact authorities in the event of a school intrusion or medical emergency. Students with cell phones would also be able to contact their parents in an emergency to inform them that they are safe. In addition, schools can program emergency response systems to automatically call or text message students' cell phones with emergency information or instructions. This can reduce panic in an emergency and help schools keep students safe. Cell Phones Enhance Learning Cell phones, especially smart phones, can be used to enhance learning. Smart phones offer much of the functionality of a laptop, but are more portable and less expensive. For example, a class could download an interactive program and use it on their phones. Students doing lab work can take quick pictures with their cell phone rather than making a sketch. Students can also use their phones to record parts of a lecture, make a quick voice note or take a video of a science experiment. Stay Organized With Cell Phone Calendars Supporters of cell phones in schools also argue that students can also utilize the calendar function of the cell phone to stay organized. Rather than requiring a paper planner, students can simply input assignments and test dates into their phones. Convenient Communication With Cell Phones Cell phones offer a convenient way of communication, especially useful for students who have after-school activities. Rather than guessing what time practice will end or using a school phone, students can easily call or text their parents to let them know they need a ride or will be late. Parents and students also have an easy way to contact each other throughout the day if they need to send a message. Cell Phone Use in Schools Many schools struggle to develop policies for appropriate cell phone use. Cell phones have many beneficial uses, like helping students stay organized and keeping students safe, but they can also have negative impacts, including facilitating cheating on tests, texting during class and the spreading of rumors. As in business and social environments, there are always situations during which cell phone use is not appropriate. Parents considering whether to give their children cell phones should contact their child's school to learn the cell phone policies, including the punishments for inappropriate cell phone use during class. http://rebekahrichards.suite101.com... Pros of Cell Phones in School There are numerous positive outcomes that can emerge from permitting children and teens to bring their mobile phones into the classroom. Here are just a few that you should keep in mind the next time you enter a PTA meeting or other public debate. Instant Communication Although you hope that you will never have to do this, you sometimes need to get in contact with your school-aged child while they are in class. This could be because of a death in the family, an accident or other family emergency that may require his or her attention and/or attendance. By being able to call your child directly, you also help alleviate the workload off of the school's administrative team. This is particularly useful during recess and lunch hours when students aren't in classrooms anyways, and it may be more difficult to find your child. The problems with knowing where your children are after school could also be reduced if parents had the ability to call them (and vice versa). Text messages also make this easy (and discrete). Memory Aids Most cell phones have a camera these days, so children can use these to take pictures of things in class. This is great for science class, for example, where they may be exposed to certain creatures, plants and other things that they probably won't encounter anywhere else. This is much more effective that simply producing a quick sketch. Pictures are also useful for any sort of step-by-step process, so that they can later review the photos to better understand the procedure in metalwork, woodwork or other hands-on courses. Better still, give your child a camera phone with video capabilities! Voice Notes Sometimes, it takes too long to write down a note, so why not use the cell phone to record a quick voice note instead? Students may not always have immediate access to a notepad either, so using a cell phone to "jot down" important information is also useful. http://cellphones.lovetoknow.com... *** All in all these articles state that cell phones in school are good because they are there when there is an emergency. Cellphones are instant rather than going through the office or school phone to get ahold of a parent or 911. Cellphones are their to enhance many things such a memory and learning content. From a personal experience we had a bomb threat while i was in middle school, and children who had cellphones were able to call their parents or guardian to tell them they were safe and needed to be picked up from the school. Cellphones may be a distraction but there is always a time and place for them to be out and in use. *** Analise Bruno

Title: Why cell phones should not be allowed in classrooms Content: Yes there is a possibility of the phone's being dangerous during an emergency as they could sound off during a break in but a solution for that is to have a rule in the class stating that when one enters the classroom their cellphones need to be turned to silent. With the research projects , yes students might goof off and go on their social media pages rather than researching for their assignment, but in the end they'd be the ones hurting their grade. It's on them to do the work or goof off.

Title: There are possible safety concerns Content: When mobile phones first came out there was a lot of worry about the possible effect on children’s health. We now know there is little risk. But the advice from health experts is still that children should avoid too much use of mobiles. Experts still worry that the use of mobiles could be linked with behavioural problems in children, this can mean problems such as being disruptive or having difficulty sleeping.

Title: Using a mobile phone in the car is unnecessary - everyone coped without mobiles ten years ago, and l... Content: Using mobiles on the road could improve safety, for example, by allowing delayed employees to ring in to the office rather than drive recklessly in an effort to arrive more promptly. Drivers now often use mobile phones to report accidents to the emergency services, and alert the police to dangerous driving, stray animals, unsafe loads, etc.

Title: Mobile phones should be banned in schools! Content: I apologize if I ever offended you, con. I pasted half of your argument into mine to make rebuttals easier.Banning phones in school has been hotly debated everywhere, especially here on the Internet. Both sides (agrees to ban or against) are understandable in every way, but all we need to know is which side is totally acceptable and superior than the other. While cell phones certainly offer students increased communication abilities, providing students with a tool for added safety and parent contact, many public school leaders assert that cell phones are a severe distraction in the educational process. The following are sourced.[1] According to the National School Safety and Security Offices (NSSSO), cell phones have been an increasingly negative disruption in schools: “We have opposed policies allowing or encouraging students to have cell phones and pagers in school. On a day-to-day basis, they are disruptive to the educational environment. This also has been the general position of many school districts over the years.” The NSSSO argues that allowing cell phones for safety reasons is inaccurate. As they explain, “Changing policies under the guise of cell phones being a crisis tool for student safety is, in our opinion, a knee-jerk reaction and is not ‘the answer’ to school crisis preparedness that some may believe it to be.” In fact, oftentimes school and security officials report that students falsely call in bomb threats or reports of threats on their cell phones as an over-reaction or as a prank; in such cases, these cell phones can force the entire evacuation of a school, while also making it nearly impossible for security teams to try and figure out where the call was placed, and which student(s) made the call.These are based from the number of public schools the strongly disagrees in allowing phones within the school premises. Rebuttals"Mobiles can save the lives, though it is necessary to be with every kid in school, because they can use it to inform their families in case of any emergency."For this one, I agree, but I stated the cons behind this on the very first round. To let things be clear and to refresh minds, let me quote what I said: "2.) 'For emergency' Is the most used excuse in this kind of topic. Parents think of cell phones as a connection to their children in an emergency. But I wonder what the last situation was that genuinely called for an immediate phone call to a child. In most cases, contacting the hospital or the police would seem more urgent. And parents can always call the school's main office to reach their children."Scroll up if you do not believe me, but these are the exact wordings from my previous argument. "Mobiles as a library:You can get any information you need by single click. it actually enables you to have a world in your hand."This is the reason why we have libraries within almost every school. Everyone would agree that books are far superior than looking for it on the internet. On the web we can never be sure that the article that we read about Science or maybe History are actually true. For all we know, someone unexperienced could post false informations on the topic. But with the books that are in the library, we are certain that the statistics or data written in these books are accurate because authorized and skilled authors wrote them.Using a phone can be quick, but when it comes to real infos, I'll have to wonder what the point is.Con also declared:"Mobiles are socially important:I am sure if yourself does not carry a mobile in school, your mates would laugh on you, because you may not find anyone without mobile, therefore if you dont have you would feel awkward and that would show you cheap, though mobiles are socially important."Have we been lost on the subject? We are only talking about banning phones in school, but it doesn't mean that we do not have them."Mobiles make you easy reachable:You can be reached anytime and anywhere, and this can be done with mobiles."This is similar to the one with the emergency calls. Parents can call the teacher or the school. If this is the only reason why we should lift the ban, then it is not reasonable enough. This is the only appropriate reason why this debate hasn't ended for years. If this is the only problem, the parents can have the advisers' phone numbers to contact their children. This might be ridiculous to hear, but the truth is, phones are the top contributor in decreasing children's interest in school. So if this is the right way, it must be done."I will give a live example for you, suppose your little brother has fallen from roof and your mom and dad is on a long trip, and you are the only one living with your brother, in the same time he is fallen from roof, you are in school, what if you dont have mobile and you are not aware of your little brother!!though accept it that mobile should not be banned in schools, because you would never know what gonna happen next!"Again, this is identical to the previous one. Communication, again and again.I suppose calling the authorities is better if I ever experienced this kind of accident. Calling parents that are in a long trip isn't the priority here. Your brother must be in a hospital so the first thing that I would do is to call the teachers and have them call the ambulance. If the injury is not that severe, bringing it to the school nurse is alright. The teacher can call the parents on the trip just to let them know what happened.Rebuttals against con's rebuttals:"-Cheating:I would like to state, that no where in the world is allowing mobiles during exam! though cheating in exam is pointless!It is not as simple as you think, that you can ever cheat through your mobile during exam, and if you think you are a bright kid you dont need to cheat!!"No one is allowing phone during exam, yes, and that is equal to prohibition from school. Cheating in exam is pointless. That's also why schools should ban them. Not every child is smart enough to realize that. "-Texting:I think pro is forgetting about the topic! The topic is banning mobiles in school not in class!"I am not forgetting about the topic, con. Where exactly is a class? It's in a school."1. Schools are having policy for banning mobiles inside the class! and during the class time no kid is allowed to use their mobiles, if they ever use they are banned in the class but school does not bear the right to make the mobile banned in school."Disallowing it in class is also as important as banning it in school. Cheating is possible when in class. It's also possible in school. "2. there are reasons for those kids who set behind and they are not concentrating in the class! that is the responsibility of school master to check whether the kid is interested in the subject or not and they should find out if the teacher is not boring for them, though we can say a good system in schools would never stop kids to use mobile!if they trust on their education system they should not make the mobiles banned!"Banning phones is equal to removing the top contributor of losing the students' interest in school. Therefore, we are reducing the chances of having a stupid society in the future. It's the responsibility of the school master to know if the kid is interested? School masters' job is to run the school smoothly, not for making sure that the students are interested or not. "if they trust on their education system they should not make the mobiles banned!"? Con, you should definitely check if this sentence is correct. I Think you could figure it out yourself without someone pointing it out for you. They should trust their education system if they ban phones.Con, mobiles are definitely used for entertainment when in school. It's useful outside, but within the school it isn't helpful. To answer your question, I home study because I currently reside in a foreign country with a foreign language and a foreign culture. Source:http://www.publicschoolreview.com...;

Title: Cell phones in cars can be regulated, unlike other distractions Content: "Editorial: Cellphone ban long overdue". The Dominion Post. June 12th, 2008 - "Previous attempts to stop motorists using hand-held cellphones foundered in the face of arguments that cellphones are just one form of driver distraction. Eating, loading cassettes or CDs into car stereos, dropped cigarettes and even buzzing insects can be equally hazardous. But cellphone use, which contributed to 26 fatal crashes and 411 injury crashes between 2002 and 2007, is something the Government can do something about now."

Title: cell phones should be allowed in school Content: I'm very glad to be facing my opponent and do value his opinion however the resolution as stated ought to be affirmed. If I can prove the benefits outweigh the possible negative prospects of having cell phones in school then it is only logical that pro should be the victor of this debate.First let me state that I do agree that cell phones have the potential to be a distraction in school. But anything can be a distraction in school like other students, food,teachers, etc.. but this distraction can be a positive thing. Cell phones have many educational purposes in the class room. As technology and smart phones are improving technologically students have more access to tools to help them educationally and in some other situations. The benefits are as follows1.Cell phones improve school safety.As we know schools can never be 100% safe. In the event of an emergency where students safety is at risk or there is some sort of emergency. Students can let the police or fire department know much faster than the school can. In the event that a violent subject is actually in the classroom threatening the student body and if police cannot get information or line of sight on the target students can send videos to give the police an idea of how to further approach the situation. Students can also get advise from negotiators if they are faced with hostile situations. If a student is in some area of the school where no one else is around they can contact someone to help if they have an asthma attack. Students also have the option of texting police in an emergency. As we can see cell phones can be a very comfortable option to emergencies in the school. Especially if you have a personal life or death situation and no one is around. Cell phones can also be used to get a ride after school and to notify parents of spontaneous after school meetings.2. Cell phones can improve organization and save students money while helping the environment .Cell phones have calendars and memos witch helps students remember homework and report due dates therefore possibly raising students grades. Students can take pictures of notes and reference them later or take pictures of a reading assignment and read it when they have free time. Students can also record a lecture and possibly fall a sleep if they want to( I don't know if this is good or bad but I just wanted to throw it out there.) Students can also now take notes on their phones witch means they save trees and money because students wont need to buy as much paper thus reducing the deficit on the environment and save trees. So as we can see cell phones have a good economic advantage to students. In these tough economic times every penny we can save can help families economically. Lastly on this point if a student has a free period they can use their phones to keep track of the time so they can get to their next class on time.3. Cell phones provide Internet access and calculators.Some schools may not have good Internet access or none at all. These cell phones can connect to the Internet witch gives students additional educational resources. Internet access also means that students can instantly look up any information they can understand. Like if the teacher is using many big words the student can quickly find definitions via their phone rather than taking a long time and missing parts of the lecture while trying to find definitions from a dictionary. Cell phones also offer calculators. Calculators are expensive and schools may not be able to buy scientific calculators for advanced math and science. Most if not all cell phones have very advanced calculators. If the schools cant afford calculators why not let the students use their own? If students have access to calculators teachers have more time to teach materials due to decreased problem solving time.Closing statement.as we can see cell phones have multiple benefits. This resolutions benefits outweigh its prospective negative aspects. Cell phones improve school safety, improve organization and saves money while helping the environment, and they also provide Internet access and calculators to take advantage of for educational purposes. As we can see cell phones are a good thing to have in schools therefore this resolution ought to be affirmed according to my case and this debate.

Title: Cell phones in school Content: The use of cell phones in school can create an enviornment based on: distruption to instruction, cheating, and the use of pornography. I feel that teachers cannot fulfill full obligations in a classroom if students are being distracted by the use of a cell phone. DISMANTES, T. (2010). RECENT COURT RULING REGARDING STUDENT USE OF CELL PHONES IN TODAY'S SCHOOLS. "Education", 131(2), 404-406. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Cyberbullying and sexting may also be an issue. Cyberbullying is the use of electronic communication technologies to intentionally engage in repeated or widely disseminated cruel acts towards another that results in emotional harm. Sexting is whenever someone sends a nude image via cell phone texting and is also a type of cyberbullying. This can happen both on & off of school grounds--anywhere that students are physically together. "Electronic aggression is a contributing factor in altercations that occur on campus and creates an enviornment in which students do not feel safe coming to school or are unable to focus effectively on their studies (pg. 76)." Willard, N. (2011). SCHOOL RESPONSE TO CYBERBULLYING AND SEXTING: THE LEGAL CHALLENGES. "Bringham Young University Education and Law Journal," (1) 75-125. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. -Courtney Carlisle

Title: Mobile Phones Used by Children Content: Mobile phones are safe for children to use – we should ignore scare stories in the media. The lates...

Title: Ban cell phones for people under 16 Content: A World Health Organization study released in 2010 showed that using a mobile for more than half-an-hour a day for ten years increased the risk of a brain tumor. Many public health experts believe that, as serious risks to children could be involved, we cannot wait for science to be conclusive. John Wargo, Ph.D., professor of Environmental Risk and Policy at Yale University and lead author of a report released in February 2012 by US health charity EHHI that "The scientific evidence is sufficiently robust showing that cellular devices pose significant health risks to children and pregnant women." (mobilewise.org) Parents should be building relationships with their children and not relying on cell phones to keep tabs on them. There are many instances where a cell phone is useless, dead battery, poor signal or turned off any of these instances would add to a parents worries about their child. Victims of cyber bullying are the targets of lies or vicious gossip or are victims of impersonation. Most parents of victims have no idea it's happening. Victims often don't want to tell their parents about it; they may be embarrassed or, they may not fully realize that they are being bullied. They know that what is happening makes them feel bad but may not connect with the fact that it is wrong and something that they should tell someone about. Cyber bullying can lead to suicide. According to the CDC (Centers for Disease Control), 4,400 children a year commit suicide and for every child who dies there are 100 suicide attempts. Cyber bullying has been linked to suicide, whether the child is the bully or the one being bullied. Children under 16 should not have cell phones but should supervised by adults.

Title: Many things in cars are just as distracting as cell phones Content: These include eating, changing tapes, retuning the radio, arguing with your spouse about directions, trying to stop children squabbling, etc. We should not introduce a law that victimizes mobile phone users under all conditions, while completely ignoring many other causes of accidents.

Title: Should childrens have cellphones Content: I agree with you that it is an expensive way and that children will no longer but the main reason in support of kids having cell phones is safety. Childrens can call home or emergency services when trouble arises when armed with a cell phone, as well as giving us the ability to locate their whereabouts with GPS features.

Title: Cell phone bans in cars do not save lives Content: "Cell-phone ban may not reduce car wrecks, study says". Sacramento Business Journal. September 16, 2004 - James Prieger an economist at the University of California Davis. - "In our sample, the true effect on accidents is apparently too small to be statistically significant. That is not to say that we think there is no danger at all from using cell phones while driving."

Title: Children should use technology like a computer, mobile phone, and television Content: **Children should use technology like a computer, mobile phone, and television because they can use it for researching information, doing projects, using e-books instead of old and heavy textbooks, it also makes the world closer and smaller by talking in social media programs, also the social media programs can make your child speak up and be confident to talk, it also, improves your communicating skills, last, this is another way to teach children, and the children are interested in.** REBUTTAL I believe that children aren't getting other needed things because of all of these technologies, and their are many dangers to these devices. 1)Invisible Radiation from Wireless"Technology and Electricity Inhibits Your Oxygen Supply https://www.scienceoflight.org... 2)Electrosmog can cause brain fog & electrosensitivity (ES)."Symptoms include: ~ Mental confusion ~ Headaches ~ Disruptive sleep patterns ~ Chronic fatigue ~ Depression ~ Hypersensitivity and erratic blood pressure ~ Skin complaint ~"Behavioural patterns in children 3)Cell phones are addictive. A)One of the worst things with this technology is it allows young minds to have unlimited access to sexually graphic images and pornography. It has been proven that when kids are exposed to sex at a young age, they have future problems with identity, intimacy, and successful relstionships. B)There are studies that link large technology use to anxiety disorders and depression. https://www.google.com... 4)Studies show that too much texting and Social Media affect social skills and growth in a negative way. It's like learning a language. A child is grasping for ways to communicate, and absorbs whatever is there. If the child hears Spanish, they absorb Spanish. If they hear English, they absorb English. If they are in social situations, they learn social skills. If all they primarily see is a device, they absorb communicating through a device, rather than through face to face human interactions. This is not helpful with interacting with kids, adults later, or being successful at work as an adult. https://m.huffpost.com... ----- http://www.dailymail.co.uk... https://www.webmd.com...

Title: Mobile phones are now a valuable part of student life. Because parents feel their children are safe... Content: Mobile phones are inappropriate in schools. They take students’ attention away from their lessons and undermine discipline. Rules about having them turned off in lessons are impossible to enforce – students just put them in silent mode and secretly text or play games in the back of the class. There have been many cases of students using mobiles to cheat in tests, and some of students recording embarrassing footage of their teachers to post on the internet. Schools are for learning and anything which gets in the way of that should be banned.

Title: Banning cell phones impedes on individual liberties. Content: Mobile phones don’t kill people, bad driving does, and simply banning the use of phones will penalize the many good drivers without removing the dangerous ones.

Title: Ban cell phones for people under 16 Content: Bullying does occur even without cellphones and children should tell their parents, but the responsibility does not rest solely with children. If parents are not involved in their children"s lives and rely on cell phones to know where they are and what they are doing then they will miss some or all of the signs you pointed out. The fact is that staying involved in your children"s life may be one of the hardest things you'll ever face; studies show that it's also one of the most significant things you can do to ensure your child makes it to a happy adulthood. Parents often cite safety as a major reason for wanting to give their child a cell phone. They believe that the ability to easily reach their kid and vice versa means it is somehow safer. But I think the result is exactly the opposite. Giving a child a cell phone creates a false sense of security and that can cause parents to be less diligent about the details of their child's life. And while it's true that a cell phone makes it easy for you to reach your child anytime, anyplace, it also makes it easy for everyone else to reach your child, anytime, anyplace. And this easy access and exposure can dramatically reduce your child's safety. Behind the concern over children's safety lies an important question: Where is your kid going that is so dangerous? If your child's daily life involves situations like school and extracurricular activities, there are probably plenty of phones around at any given moment. When your kid is at school, there is a phone in the school office and chances are there's one in every classroom they sets foot in, on top of all that there are cell phones in every teacher's pocket or purse. When it comes to extracurricular activity, if the activity is in a building, like a dance studio or a gym, that facility surely has a phone. Even if the activity takes place outside like on a sports field, I am sure that the coach and all of the other parents have cell phones. Rather than giving your child a cell phone, do something that will really make a difference in terms of her safety and quality of life. Make an effort to get to know the teachers, coaches and other parents well enough to exchange contact info and even cell phone numbers with them.

Title: Banning cell phones is not the best way to save lives Content: Paul Tetlock, Jason Burnett and Robert Hahn. "Ban Cell Phones In Cars?". Cato.org. December 29, 2000 - "A prudent regard for safety doesn't imply cell phones should be banned. Americans are willing to tolerate some 41,000 annually deaths from car accidents. If we wish to decisively curtail automobile deaths, the national speed limit should be set at 10 miles per hour and vigorously enforced--yet we're not willing to do that, because that inconvenience outweighs the pleasure and efficiency of being able to get places quickly."

Title: Students Should be Allowed to Have Their Cell Phones at School Content: Although cell phones may be helpful in our everyday lives, it is also important that we keep them safe and schools must put this rule in place so that they are safe. Please vote. Thank you for the debate.

Title: Should kids have cell phones in school Content: How helpful are cell phones in a classroom? They can Google answers, and find definitions. And if you're doing that then you defeat the point of being in the classroom. Pick up books if you want to learn about history or science. By a standard calculator if you need to use a calculator instead of jumping on to a phone. Cell phones may be able to be useful in class, but students should not be using them if they disregard the teacher's instruction. Telling your friend about how bad class is is not important. Sure they can be used in certain situations for safety, but by distracting students, it is doing more harm. It may not seem like very much, but a lack of an education can be harmful to a pupil. It can be used in a situation for safety, but so can a knife. In the wrong hands though it will not be used for it's intended purposes. Cell phones are a nuisance, and it has been confirmed that texting and social networking are addictive, and can cause harm to a person's physical and mental state. Yes physical. Reports show people who use social network and text often have developed carpel tunnel syndrome. They have also seen a decline in face to face social interactions. You may find it weird when a stranger talks to you about the bus being late, or the weather, or simply greeting you with "hi, how are you?" but before social networking and texting, that was the social norm. You gained friends by talking to strangers. Texting and social networking has caused harm to the Y generation. Sure, you may argue that if students were taught to use them properly, and taught to not use their phones without a teacher's permission, then everything would be fine, but that's just it. No one is going to listen to you anyways because they are too busy texting the guy sitting across from them telling them how they like the girl sitting next to him. I think cell phones should be allowed by teachers so that students can write down a reminder for a test, or write down their homework. And in school, a student's schedule should determine their cell phone use, with an emergency contact for the student to call for help from a family member, but schools should have the ability to take away the child's texting capability unless they press the emergency contact button, and a teacher can allow the release of cell phones to be used if the child is asking someone that might know something, or allow them to research things on the internet. But, a student should not be able to whoop out their phone in the middle of a lecture just to text their friends. Again, yes they CAN be a useful tool, but it is unlikely the students would use them in a proper, school appropriate manner. And if you are a person in high school, let me strongly suggest you do not try anything funny with your phone in a class in college. The teacher is the boss, and they can make up most any rules they want for the class and you are to abide by them, or they can remove you, or just your cell phone, from the room.

Title: mobile phone is paralysis to youngster mind Content: Smartphones are useful tools to kids because it teaches them responsibility. Since they like their phone so much, they will be careful not to lose it and this will help them develop future skills for life such as orginization. Also, parents can use a cellphone as a motivator, letting kids have it after they do something good, such as taking out the trash, washing dishes, setting table,etc. The phones can help kids learn valuabe character traits that can be used later in life, when they really matter, but a cellphone gives kids a chance to hone these traits in a safe enviroment.