Some people believe that governments should have access to people’s mobile phone call records and messages for safety reasons. Others believe that this information is private and should not be available without permission. Discuss both these views and give your opinion.

In our fast-paced society, the phenomenon of government control over the citizens' call records and messages has long been a subject of controversial debate. Some societies have a notion that restrictions are required,

whereas

others allege that if it happens, it means the violation of the rights of people. In the forthcoming paragraphs,

this

essay will elucidate both viewpoints and provide a logical conclusion from my standpoint. First and foremost, proponents of the idea that the executive powers should have access to people's telephones claim that it is good for our safety. In today's global era, a person can easily meet new acquaintances on social media platforms who can be fraudulent and misleading . Meanwhile, when they start to give some private information about their lives or belongings, they can encounter some problems

such

as infringement of their privacy, placing them at a heightened threat of being penniless.

Therefore

, the authorities' involvement might be considered as one of the best ways to direct these issues.

Conversely

, opponents of the view that doing it without permission can result in some confidentiality problems for communities claim that it is not an adequate method to govern

such

problems.

Thus

, when the messages and phone calls ,which are encoded in our phones, are read by experts in power, they can witness any personal circumstances in our lives without questioning.

However

, it is important to emphasize that the experts can help us to prevent some unfavourable conditions from happening

while

doing it with the means of surveys and feedback from the residents. In conclusion, after having meticulously discussed both aspects of

this

tendency,

it is clear that

government control of our electronic appliances should be implemented through permission. I am a staunch believer that a delicate balance between the interventions of authority and freedom might be key to mitigating the dire ramifications of aforementioned predicaments, protecting posterity from the potential risks of technology for the sake of communities.