Arguments: 1. The very fact that it is illegal makes it a target for teenagers to gain social status by drinking , as is true for other illegal substances such as marijuana .
2. Because it is harder to get , when young people manage to obtain alcohol they tend to have high rates of binge-drinking .
3. By imposing a high drinking age in the US and the UK , illegal drinking is seen as even more attractive because it is exclusive .
4. For many teenagers , underage drinking is seen as a way to gain respect from their peers and appear cool , or to feel more at ease in social situations .
5. Lowering the drinking age would remove this illicit appeal and encourage people to drink more moderately when they do drink .

Debate: This House Would Lower The Drinking Age


Arguments: 1. There is no reason to expose referees to criticism , threats and derision when we have the means to help them .
2. Goals are the ultimate measure of success in football ; technology would reduce the risk of teams losing matches unfairly due to controversial decisions -LRB- see FIFA World Cup Quarter Final 2010 England v Germany -RRB- .
3. Howard Webb has added his voice to the pro-technology debate : `` anything that makes my job easier , that makes me more credible , I 've an open mind to .
4. GLT is a tool meant to assist referees in their decisions , not undermine them .
5. I personally prefer it when there is no debate about the referees .
6. We are still using human opinion in those decisions and maybe on a matter of fact like the goal-line some technology might be the way forward .
7. It 's at speed , and it ai n't easy .
8. It 's a difficult position , -LSB- to judge over the line -RSB- .
9. It 's for other people to decide where that argument goes . ''
10. Sometimes I feel in a less than privileged position by not having the opportunity -LSB- to use technology -RSB- but that 's where we are .

Debate: This House would introduce goal line technology in football


Arguments: 1. In Afghanistan 17 % of victims are children .
2. Unlike other weaponry , landmines remain hidden in the ground long after conflicts have ended , killing and maiming civilians in some of the worlds poorest countries years , even decades later .
3. America should neither practise nor condone this kind of warfare .
4. Landmines are a terrible and immoral tool of war .
5. But we must start somewhere we can make a difference by capitalising on the global movement against landmines , and we should .
6. Even if other weaponry has similar effects , it doesnt mean landmines are acceptable it means they are bad , too .

Debate:
This House (as the USA) Would Sign the Ottawa Convention banning landmines