In many cities the use of video cameras in public places is being increased in order to reduce crime, but some people believe that these measures restrict our individual freedom. Do the benefits of increased security outweigh the drawbacks?

It is indeed true that,

video

surveillance cameras have been used increasingly in public places in the majority of the cities in order to decrease the number of crimes. While some groups claim that, the usage of

video

cameras in public places is opposite of people’s freedom, I personally believe that, they would have considerable advantages rather than disadvantages. On the one hand, some people disapprove these kind of

video

cameras to be installed in public places. Perhaps, the

first

objection might be, the invasion of privacy. They think that, they are regarded by some private firms and they control every single movement of people.

That is

,

therefore

, they convinced that, these cameras object their liberty. The

second

probable reason might be, the

video

cameras are an alternative of office officers patrolling and they believe that if it is indeed happening, the residents would not feel safe anymore and it will cause a range of negative consequences like dramatic increase range of stress. In support of the idea of having

video

cameras in public place, I would argue that, the simple result of that, is it deters the criminals and reduce the number of crimes. Having evidences reported from the news, I believe that, these cameras are one key factor to reduce violation and even petty crimes like pickpocketing in crowded public areas. The other reason that I would like to state is that, these sorts of cameras has been useful tools to track offenders and could help police office o trace back and even recognise them. I conclusion, I, once again, asset that, the existence of the surveillance cameras has obvious benefits in the cities and people feel safer.