In many cities the use of video cameras in public places is being increased in order to reduce crime, but some people believe these measures restrict our individual freedom. Do the benefits of increased security outweigh the drawbacks?
It is undoubtedly true that rising criminal activities are becoming bane for citizens ubiquitously such as property theft, vandalism and many more. In many metropolitan areas CCTV is on the increase with the express purpose of reducing crime; however, some would argue that these encroach upon our liberty. This essay will argue that the advantages do not outweigh the disadvantages because surveillance cameras do not deter serious criminals and the vast majority of people they record are innocent members of society who have a right to privacy.
To initiate with the disadvantages, most advocates of increased surveillance argue that cameras deter crime because criminals are less likely to commit crimes if they know they are being watched. This might be the case for petty crime, but it does not prevent more serious crimes. Drug dealers and murderers can simply use areas that are not monitored or do something to obscure their identity. The recent attacks on Paris by terrorists demonstrate that all areas are vulnerable no matter how many cameras are pointing at them.
This argument is further weakened by the fact that the overwhelming majority of people filmed in public places are ordinary, law abiding citizens and this is an infringement of their rights. A person ought not to have their every move digitally recorded, when all they want to do is travel to their job or go shopping. Many a person is left with a choice of either surrendering his/her privacy or not going to public spaces, which is an erosion of the right to privacy. For example, it is estimated that a person living in any major city in the UK would be recorded up to 80% of the time they are in public.
Summing up, the drawbacks of video surveillance far outweigh the benefits because major criminals, including terrorists, are not put off by it and it results in citizens having to relinquish too much of their private lives to the state.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 13.1623246493 160% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 24.0651302605 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1616.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 326.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95705521472 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24917287072 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6935746833 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579754601227 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 45.5987176964 49.4020404114 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.666666667 106.682146367 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1666666667 20.7667163134 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 7.06120827912 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.67935871743 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.236852546745 0.244688304435 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.075421160058 0.084324248473 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0491353705072 0.0667982634062 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129552769501 0.151304729494 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0449179234756 0.056905535591 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 50.2224549098 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.4159519038 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 78.4519038076 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.