Prompt: 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?

Video cameras are the second security. For this reason, some parts of the world require the surveillance cameras which are situated in some public areas to prevent illegal actions. However, several people argue that these solutions will give restriction for individual privacy. Therefore, I strongly believe that the implementation of closed-circuit televisions has some merits and demerits. Ċ Supporters of this development assume that video cameras give some beneficial values for citizens. Firstly, those devices can secure some potential victims to a serious crime when video cameras spread in bus stations. Those tools can give a sense of fear among the criminals due to they realize that legal authority watches the condition in this location. In addition, local shops can earn much income because the surveillance cameras help them to cut down labours on duty and they can open the shop for long hours. Lastly, CCTV can be authentic evidence to investigate a vicious crime. Ċ However, the development of sophisticated video recorders violates individual privacy because the equipments restrict some activities. Take some shoppers as an example, they seem a criminal when CCTV take them under control in every corner stores. As a consequence, they do not feel to visit these supermarkets and some people point out the fact that their movements are being watched closely every minute and they do not feel relaxed. As a result, few people vote against for the camera systems. Ċ In conclusion, there are some potential drawbacks as the impact from the development of video cameras in public pleases, whereas CCTV can reduce the rate of crimes for some reasons. Having said and that, I strongly believe that the public camera system should be encouraged for a safer tomorrow.