“Society would be safer if we had security cameras in public places to catch potential criminals”
After reading this book, my opinion for this statement hasn’t change at all from the first blog. We need cameras for criminal purposes, but not for everything. We still need cameras in the public places such as malls, stores, outside in the some streets, parking lots, but not private houses. We need them for protection, but not for finding mistakes to be putted into jail.
In 1984, the telescreens were everywhere. Just one unusual movement that you make could have you arrested. Just looking at someone straight in the eyes could cause to be arrested. That’s why when Winston and Julia met in the park; they didn’t dare to face each other while they were talking, because they were afraid if the telescreen detected something is mysterious going on between them.
Overall, cameras will make the environment better than before since people are aware of their actions. Since in 1984, everything that seems like abnormal you will get arrested, but in our society, people will violent actions that are disturbing will be caught.
6 comments:
I agree with Lily, these sort of precautions do not need to be taken in order to have safety. This could result more in paranoia and fear, like some cases in 1984. Many people processed only through fear, fear of the Party and what might happen to them. Precautions should be taken to protect citizens, but they should be only taken to a certain extent.
Molly Quinn-Shea
I agree, cameras are needed to catch criminals that aren't seen in person, like shoplifters or pickpockets. I also agree that cameras should not be in private places, like homes. However if we start putting up cameras all over the place, people are going to start getting paranoid and acting like Winston and Julia, not facing each other when they talk and finding places to hide. This is because some people prefer to lead private lives and this will not be possible if there are cameras everywhere and they don't stay inside all the time.
-Megan Flood
I also agree with Lily. Though I understand the purpose of putting security cameras in some places to catch potential criminals, and the good intentions behind the idea (not in the case of the Party but in the case of our society), inevitably this would lead to censorship of people's natural selves. This would breed paranoia and could also increase the arrests of innocent people just because they looked suspicious.
N-Dog T.
It is true that society would be safer if security cameras were in public places to catch criminals, and they actually kind of are since some traffic lights have cameras to catch people that are speeding. But I do agree with what has been said. Cameras in places like malls and stuff are useful as evidence for finding criminals, but there is a limit to where cameras should be, like the comfort of a house. In 1984, one of the Party's ultimate weapons they used was fear. They had complete and watchful eye over everybody. The sign "Big Brother is Watching You" hung everywhere to keep all of their citizens in check. If the government were allowed to see every single action done by every single person, then paranoia would set into everybody and then everybody would succumb to every word of the government. Cameras are indeed very useful for the protection of people, but there is indeed a limit.
I also agree with Lily, people who are doing innocent things, don't have anything to loose by being on camera, and the level at which our cameras in public places are used isn't extreme enough that everyone lives in constant fear. Precautions are necessary, but as long as the line isn't crossed.
-Lillian Brown
Post a Comment