Some people believe more actions can be taken to prevent crime, while others think that little can be done. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion

Many concerned parties today feel that

crime

has already been reduced as much as is realistically possible. While I agree

this

may be true in nations where security is prioritized over privacy rights, there is still tremendous progress that can be made globally. Those who argue

crime

no longer needs addressing point to technological innovations.

This

situation is most apparent in authoritarian nations. Security surveillance can include the use of street cameras, digital tracking, and eavesdropping on private communications.

For instance

, in South Korea the

crime

rate in most urban areas is negligible and the average person reports little anxiety about possible criminality,

in contrast

to periods in the past when there were more instances of robbery, assault, theft, pickpocketing, and so on. These technological shifts have greatly aided law enforcement in prosecuting criminals thereby

also

increasing the deterrence of potential offences.

However

,

crime

still exists and can be countered by addressing the deeper, societal roots. The main cause of all

crime

is poverty. When individuals earn a wage sufficient to maintain a decent standard of living, the entire motive for most crimes disappears. The evidence for

this

is that in wealthy countries where there is a relatively even distribution of wealth, the

crime

rates are low and the police do not require draconian punishment or surveillance techniques. Beyond income, it is

also

possible to invest in improving mental health. Many people today spend too much time online and are vulnerable to extremist views. A still significant proportion of crimes could be eliminated by encouraging people to spend more time outdoors in their community. In conclusion, though technology has reduced certain kinds of criminality greatly, it is still possible to lower

crime

rates by embracing a holistic, societal approach. The complete eradication of

crime

is likely impossible and

therefore

there will always be a need to make progress