Some people think new technology helps to reduce crime, while others believe it could make crime easier. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Stance: Acknowledge both sides but argue that while new technology introduces new vulnerabilities, its overall benefit in crime reduction, particularly through enhanced surveillance and data analysis, outweighs the risks if implemented thoughtfully.
This answer covers both sides of the debate accurately and gives a clear opinion, but each side is supported by only one short example and linked with plain connectors ('On one hand', 'On the other hand'), giving it noticeably less depth than the 7.5 version's fuller reasoning.
New technology has led to a debate about its effect on crime. Some people think it helps reduce crime, while others believe it makes crime easier. This essay will look at both views before giving my opinion.
On one hand, technology gives police and communities useful tools to prevent crime. For example, better cameras can stop small crimes and help catch offenders. In my apartment building in Hanoi, we changed from key cards to face recognition two years ago. At first, some elderly residents worried it would be hard to use, but after a year, thefts of motorbike helmets in the building almost stopped completely.
On the other hand, technology also gives criminals new ways to commit crime. Online scams have become very common in Vietnam because almost everyone uses Zalo and Facebook. Scammers often send fake delivery messages or pretend to be police officers to trick people into sending money. Apps that protect people's privacy, such as encrypted messaging, can also be used by criminals to plan crimes more secretly.
In my opinion, technology does more good than harm in fighting crime, as long as there are good rules to control how it is used. Even though new risks will always appear, the ability to watch, respond quickly, and collect evidence gives police a real advantage.
In conclusion, technology is like a double-edged sword: it helps the police but also gives criminals new chances. Even so, I believe its overall effect on reducing crime is positive, as long as we keep improving the rules and laws around it.
Collocations
Examiner Notes
- TR“This essay will look at both views before giving my opinion.” — A simple outline sentence signals the discuss-both-views structure, though it is less specific than the higher-band version about what each side argues.
- LR“technology gives police and communities useful tools to prevent crime” — A safe, correct collocation, but plainer than the higher band's more specific 'potent tools for crime prevention and detection'.
- GRA“At first, some elderly residents worried it would be hard to use, but after a year, thefts of motorbike helmets in the building almost stopped completely.” — A correct compound sentence joined by 'but' contrasts two time points; accurate, though it lacks the fronted subordinate clause structure used at higher bands.
- CC“On the other hand, technology also gives criminals new ways to commit crime.” — The plain connector 'On the other hand' correctly signals the shift to the counter-view, though it is a more basic device than 'Conversely' used at band 7.5.
This answer sharpens the outline sentence, adds one concessive clause per body paragraph, and uses cohesive back-reference ('the same advances') rather than plain repetition, but its examples are still single-stranded compared to the 7.5 answer's added detail (specific complaint numbers, named platforms in context).
The rise of new technology has sparked debate over its impact on crime: some argue it is an essential weapon against criminal activity, while others believe it simply opens up new opportunities for offenders. This essay will discuss both views before presenting my own opinion.
On one hand, technology provides genuinely effective tools for preventing and detecting crime. Improved surveillance systems, for example, both deter petty offences and help identify suspects afterwards. I experienced this in my own apartment complex in Hanoi, where management replaced swipe-card entry with facial recognition two years ago. Although some elderly residents initially worried about privacy and ease of use, incidents such as strangers slipping into the building and helmet theft, previously a regular occurrence, had almost completely disappeared within a year.
On the other hand, the same advances also equip criminals with new methods. Online scams have surged alongside the near-universal use of Zalo and Facebook in Vietnam, with fraudsters sending fake delivery messages or impersonating police officers to pressure victims into transferring money. Moreover, tools originally designed to protect privacy, such as encrypted messaging apps, can be exploited by organised criminal groups to coordinate their activities while making it harder for the police to intervene.
My own view is that, on balance, technology is a net positive in the fight against crime, provided it is supported by strong regulation. While new vulnerabilities will always emerge, the ability to monitor situations proactively and respond quickly gives law enforcement an advantage that previous generations of police never had.
In conclusion, technology undoubtedly functions as a double-edged sword, aiding law enforcement while also creating fresh opportunities for criminals. Nevertheless, its overall potential to enhance public security is considerable, provided legal and ethical guidelines keep pace with its rapid development.
Collocations
Examiner Notes
- TR“some argue it is an essential weapon against criminal activity, while others believe it simply opens up new opportunities for offenders” — The outline sentence characterises both positions with specific language ('essential weapon', 'new opportunities') rather than the 6.5 answer's generic 'both views', showing sharper task response.
- LR“Improved surveillance systems, for example, both deter petty offences and help identify suspects afterwards.” — The paired verbs 'deter' and 'identify' with precise nouns ('petty offences', 'suspects') give more lexical precision than the 6.5 answer's simpler 'stop small crimes and help catch offenders'.
- GRA“Although some elderly residents initially worried about privacy and ease of use, incidents such as strangers slipping into the building and helmet theft, previously a regular occurrence, had almost completely disappeared within a year.” — A fronted concessive clause ('Although...') combines with an inserted appositive ('previously a regular occurrence') to build a longer, controlled sentence than anything in the 6.5 answer.
- CC“On the other hand, the same advances also equip criminals with new methods.” — The phrase 'the same advances' cohesively refers back to the technology just praised in the previous paragraph, creating a tighter link than the 6.5 answer's more generic repetition of 'technology'.
The 7.5 answer names a precise number (400-household owner group), threads a genuine concession-then-rebuttal move within each side of the debate, and varies its cohesive devices ('Conversely', 'Furthermore') rather than repeating 'on the other hand', giving it a natural, native-like flow the lower bands deliberately simplify.
The advent of new technologies has sparked a polarised debate regarding their impact on criminal activity: some contend these innovations are crucial in combating crime, while others fear they merely create fresh avenues for illicit acts. This essay will explore both viewpoints before presenting a reasoned conclusion.
Undeniably, technology offers potent tools for crime prevention and detection. Enhanced surveillance systems, for instance, deter petty theft and facilitate the identification of offenders. In my own residential community in Hanoi, I witnessed this firsthand. Two years ago, when our apartment complex upgraded its swipe-card entry to facial recognition, initial concerns about data privacy and usability for elderly residents were rampant in the 400-household owner group. Yet within a year of the system's implementation, incidents of strangers tailgating into the building and motorbike-helmet thefts, previously two or three per month, had virtually disappeared, proving the technology's efficacy despite the initial misgivings.
Conversely, technological advancements simultaneously empower criminals, enabling new forms of illicit behaviour or amplifying existing ones. Online scams, for example, have proliferated with the near-universal use of Zalo and Facebook in Vietnam, ranging from fake delivery-fee messages to elaborate impersonation calls in which scammers pose as police officers or bank staff to trick victims into transferring money. Furthermore, the very tools designed for communication or privacy, such as encrypted messaging apps, can be co-opted by organised crime syndicates to coordinate activities with greater impunity, posing significant challenges for law enforcement agencies.
My own view leans towards the perspective that, on balance, new technology is a net positive in the fight against crime, provided that robust regulatory frameworks are in place. While vulnerabilities will always emerge, the capacity for proactive monitoring, rapid response, and forensic analysis afforded by modern tools offers an unprecedented advantage to crime prevention efforts.
In conclusion, while it is true that technology presents a double-edged sword, both aiding law enforcement and offering new opportunities for criminals, its overall potential to enhance security and deter illicit activities is substantial. Careful application and continuous adaptation of legal and ethical guidelines are paramount to harnessing its benefits effectively.
Collocations
Examiner Notes
- TR“This essay will explore both viewpoints before presenting a reasoned conclusion.” — A clear outline statement signals a balanced discussion structure that directly matches the discuss-both-views task type.
- GRA“Two years ago, when our apartment complex upgraded its swipe-card entry to facial recognition, initial concerns about data privacy and usability for elderly residents were rampant in the 400-household owner group.” — A fronted time clause followed by a passive-toned main clause and a precise numerical detail shows accurate control of complex sentence structure.
- CC“Conversely, technological advancements simultaneously empower criminals, enabling new forms of illicit behaviour or amplifying existing ones.” — The discourse marker 'Conversely' signals the shift from the pro-technology paragraph to the counter-argument paragraph.
- LR“can be co-opted by organised crime syndicates to coordinate activities with greater impunity” — Precise, topic-specific vocabulary ('co-opted', 'syndicates', 'impunity') gives the crime-and-technology discussion an authoritative register.
- TR“My own view leans towards the perspective that, on balance, new technology is a net positive in the fight against crime, provided that robust regulatory frameworks are in place.” — A hedged but clear personal-opinion statement, appropriately placed after both sides have been weighed, meets the task's requirement for a reasoned conclusion.