Decreasing crime rate is the goal of many nations and people expect their governments to actively do so. A group of individuals believe that there is still a need of more serious steps to be taken to prevent crime while another group believes that whatever is being done now is sufficient. I think both the groups have their own reasons to have the opinion. I will shed some light on both aspects.
To begin with, the people who believe that crime is being combabted efficiently say so because they are making a comparison with the past. As in the past, there were more number of illegal activities that were being committed but nowadays such type of activities have reduced. To be more clear, in the early days their were crimes like theft, robbery which have reduced nowadays and other crimes which are less physical have taken their place.
Unlike those who are looking in the past, the other group focuses on implementation of stricter actions because they want to stop the crime before happening. Their motto is not just to face the problem when it comes but to be future ready and prevent the problem from even happening. They believe although the physical crimes have reduced but there are other forms of crimes that have emerged and there is still a need of actions to prevent those from of crimes. I however side myself with the second group that runs on the philosophy of prevention is better than cure. thus there is no harm in being extra cautious.
To conclude, both sides have their valid grounds. It is true that crime is being tackled in a better manner nowadays but it cannot be denied that new from of crimes are emerging and our security system should be future ready.
Decreasing
crime
rate is the goal of
many
nations and
people
expect
their
governments
to
actively
do
so
. A
group
of individuals
believe
that there is
still
a need of more serious steps to
be taken
to
prevent
crime
while another
group
believes
that whatever is
being done
now
is sufficient. I
think
both the
groups
have their
own
reasons to have the opinion. I will shed
some
light on both aspects.
To
begin
with, the
people
who
believe
that
crime
is being
combabted
efficiently
say
so
because
they are making a comparison with the past. As in the past, there were more number of illegal activities that were
being committed
but
nowadays such type of activities have
reduced
. To be more
clear
, in the early days their were
crimes
like theft, robbery which have
reduced
nowadays and other
crimes
which are less physical have taken their place.
Unlike those who are looking in the past, the other
group
focuses on implementation of stricter actions
because
they want to
stop
the
crime
before
happening. Their motto is not
just
to face the problem when it
comes
but
to be future ready and
prevent
the problem from even happening. They
believe
although the physical
crimes
have
reduced
but
there are other forms of
crimes
that have emerged and there is
still
a need of actions to
prevent
those from of
crimes
. I
however
side myself with the second
group
that runs on the philosophy of prevention is better than cure.
thus
there is no harm in being extra cautious.
To conclude
, both sides have their valid grounds. It is true that
crime
is
being tackled
in a better manner nowadays
but
it cannot
be denied
that new from of
crimes
are emerging and our security system should be future ready.