Some people believe that the personal information of violent criminals should be made available to the public. Others think that this information should be protected. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

A highly controversial issue today relates to the disclosure of dangerous criminal information. In this essay, I am going to examine this question from both points of view and then give my own opinion on the matter. On one side of the argument there are people who argue that the benefits of the offender identity publicity considerably outweigh its disadvantages. The main reason for believing this is that we can raise vigilance and protect ourselves better if we have knowledge about the law-breaker. It is also possible to say that keeping a close watch on people who commit crimes and staying away from them will be less complicated. For instance, when the extremely serious criminal on the Nayoung case in Korea was released from prison, almost all residents moved out of his neighborhood. On the other hand, it is also possible to make the opposing case. It is often argued that in fact, criminal information should not be publicized. People often have this opinion because revealing this information will cause negative impacts to family and friends of the law-break. The innocent people who did not engage in the crime can be attacked by poisonous people on the Internet and in life. A particularly good illustration here is that children whose parents are offenders are often segregated by other individuals. This will lead them to become victims of insulting the honor and discrimination. In conclusion, I believe both arguments have their merits. On balance, however, I feel that it is necessary to secure offender identity. This is because the fundamental human rights of the offenders still need to be protected and it is easier for them to integrate into community again if they have repented.