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?
Sample Response
Today, thanks to new surveillance technologies such as public camerasnew technologies being used in public areas like cameras, the rates of different types of offences have decreased dramaticallythe rate of different types of offences have been decreased phenomenally and many people welcome this monitoring system to enhance public safetyfor enhancing public safety. Some individuals, on the other hand, believe that the use of cameras in public places has increasingly intruded on citizens’ privacyhas caused citizens’ privacy to be intruded more than before. However, in my view, these devices should continue to be usedshould be continued to be used in public areas, and their benefits outweigh their potentialprobable disadvantages.
On the one hand, those believing that installing cameras in public placesinstalling cameras in the public could restrict their freedomcould be against their freedom have their own reasons. One is that they can infringe on people’s privacythey can be against people’s privacy. As a prime example, in some TV programmes, the number plates of some reckless driversthe plate number of some reckless drivers, who have violated traffic ruleswho have crossed the line, are shown to the viewers, and this can negatively affect their social prestige because their family, friends or co-workers might have watched this programme. Furthermore, these recorded videos can be misused. In some public premises, there is insufficient control over the storage of data captured by these camerasthere is not appropriate control on the preservation of data received by these cameras; therefore, individuals’ pictures might be stolen and used for other purposesaspects, including sharing them on YouTubeon the YouTube or other social networks. The feeling someone is always watching is somewhat not accepted by many as they think that a good citizen has a right to enjoy his privacy.
On the other hand, despite these setbacksdespite having the mentioned setbacks, their positive effects are far more prominenttheir positive influences are far prominent. One major benefit is a better control of vandalism by the police force. Obviously, the best source of access to what has occurred during public brawls is monitoring the recorded videos. In particular, the police of Vancouver had been able to arrest those hundreds of vandals, who mainly were Husky fans, ruined plenty of public and private premises in 2011. Had not these cameras been installed in streets, the Vancouver police would not have had any reliable resource to capture these outlaws. In addition, this can assist the judge to track better terrorists. Clearly, numerous of violators can be followed by the order of court or police annually, while there were no such valuable records before. For instance, in 2013, the police of Boston used these videos and could detect the two boys who were responsible for explosion during a marathon running. We need to keep in mind that the cameras installed in public places are meant to prevent any crime or to detect a criminal. The good citizens have nothing to worry about. However, the monitoring authority should make sure that no misuse of those public cameras is done by anyone in any circumstances.
In brief, although some may agree that usage of public cameras can be against the citizens’ privacy, from my perspective, the benefits gained by these devices are far greater. They can be useful for police to detain far easier offenders or terrorists who jeopardise other people’s lives.
Why this response received Band 7.0
The response presents a clear position and develops both privacy concerns and security benefits with relevant, specific examples, giving the argument substantial coverage. Its main limitation is that awkward collocations and recurring grammatical errors sometimes make otherwise strong points sound imprecise; the highest priority is to revise complex sentences for accurate clause structure and choose more natural academic phrasing.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The response answers the comparative question clearly and develops both drawbacks and benefits with relevant explanation and examples.
Make the comparison more rigorous by weighing the seriousness and likelihood of the privacy harms directly against the security gains.
Coherence and Cohesion
The argument progresses logically through a clear introduction, contrasting body sections, and a consistent conclusion, although some internal links are awkward.
Use clearer referencing and tighter cause-and-effect links within the longer security paragraph so each example advances the comparison smoothly.
Lexical Resource
A broad range of topic vocabulary conveys nuanced ideas, but inaccurate collocations and word choices occur repeatedly.
Replace awkward combinations such as far prominent, numerous of violators, and detain far easier with precise, natural academic phrasing.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
The response uses varied complex structures, but recurring errors in agreement, articles, passives, and clause construction reduce control.
Revise each complex sentence for complete clause relationships and accurate verb forms, especially where relative clauses and passives are combined.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
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?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.