1.

Assalamualaikum and very good morning to our,

beloved dr radzuwan, my team member of the
government side, the opposition side, sir azweed,
our chairperson, miss timekeeper and for all
member of this floor
The topic for our motion today is, This house would
legalise the use of cell phones in cars
Before I present my definition for our motion for today, I
like to highlight on the words USE OF CELL PHONES
IN CARS.
But before that, I think most of us can understand the
meaning of legalise. So I will not further explain the
meaning of legalise and instead, I will only be explain it
in a brief. Legalise mean you allow some subject matter
to be excuted as you would allow it under the law.
Also In my definition, I will covered up to what extend
as it means that it will consider as the use of phones In
the car but before that let me explain a little bit about
cell phone
A simple meaning is that cell phone is a portable,
wireless telephone. As the world advance, so is the
technology, a phone which only can be use as device to
connect people now has more function than ever was
be. Nowadays It can be use as a gps, mp3 camera and
much more. It take forever if u want me to list down it
usage. Cell phones were designed to made a change in
our culture. So that we could stay in touch with those
we care when we travelling, we could do business while
struck in traffic, we could call immediately for help in a
case of emergency situation
In US, there was study about the crash data base from
all reported crash states that driver inattention is

estimated to be the factor of car crash. But, from the

statistic which stated about 50% - 80% of the driver
inattention, there were only 1.5% - 5% which blame the
use of cellphone for the driver inattention. The rest of
driver inattention is like sleepy while driving, drunk ,
adjusting the radio channel and also in drug trafficking.
So, the use of cellphone is not the main cause for the
driver inattention to be in car crash.
Now comes a new study on California drivers that
shows virtually no meaningful change in accident rates
before and after a cellphone ban took place. Unless
this study is refuted, the best safety advocates may
say is that cellphone bans may improve road safety.
Back to the sentence the use of cell phone in car, to
what extent that this sentence cover up? Is it only in
driving or stopping in traffic light or even in parking.
No, base in my definition it start when we enter the car
and until we get out from the car. Yes, it include during
driving and until parking the car . This is what we will
discuss in the debate. I think that the usage of cell
phone in car should be legalize as It the matter of
our freedom. I think
We the affirmative team believe that this statement is
true.

My first point is, is freedom of a person. As provide in

article 5 Federal Constitution, fundamental liberty,
liberty of the person, no person should be deprived
of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with
the law
The state places rules upon its citizens for the overall
betterment of society. However, whenever possible the
state should also affords citizens liberty.
This is the case because the state sees that when
people are free to do what they wanted to do, they are
able to make better decisions for themselves and
further are able to interact with the state better. They
do this because they feel that the state is allowing
them to make their own decisions and as such the state
is showing its trust in its citizens. So the citizen, in
respond will trusting their choice in choosing the
current government in the first place, this MAY avoid an
event such as Bersih, which was just happening
recently. This bond of trust between the state and the
citizens as well as the state giving the citizens their
own responsibilities means that citizens respect the
state for the fact that it does not limit theirs right.
To examine from this point of view that does not rely on
moral consequentialism and a utility based principle, it
is possible to say that the state should afford people

liberty and freedom because the starting point of any

rational moral calculus should be the admission that an
individual is the best judge of what is in his own
interest. To not give people choice is ultimately an idea
that dehumanises the human itself. As such, the only
time where freedoms should truly be restricted is when
allowing the freedom resulting in a greater level of
dehumanisation among the people. So for example, we
prevent murder because allowing people to kill one
another results in allowing some people to entirely
remove other peoples ability to choose on purpose.
So ladies and Gentlemen, in conclusion I am proud to
propose that i would like to reaffirm today motion which
is, This house would legalise the use of cell
phones in cars because we as citizen should not be
limit our right.
question
Jimmy: do you heard my previous argument, after a
banning in California, the rates of accident didnt
decrease. So we can see how using cellphones in car
does not crucially effecting the accident rate.
Agai: if u said to park at the end of the road or the side
of the road, do you expect for me to get out from the
car because technically It will still be consider as use of
cellphones in car so allow to repeat ours today motion
which is This House would legalise the use of
cellphones in cars.
Answer:
Agai: of course the safety of the passenger, the
pedestrian and myself as a driver is important however,

as I had said before, I didnt think it will be any effect if

we use cellphone in cars
Woe: why would u bringing this up, it is totally
irrelevant and if you the opposition team want to make
a focus, it should be on the driver. So the answer is yes,
they can use the phones, that is what we, the
government had been talking from the very beginning
as it is in today motion, This house would legalise the
use of cell phones in cars