Mapping the world's opinions

argument top image

Has surveillance gone too far? Show more Show less

Post-9/11, there was a sharp increase in the amount that ordinary citizens are watched by the state. Rapidly progressing technologies mean that it is possible to track and watch people like never before. While supporters argue that this is a small price to pay for increased safety and the prevention of terrorism, others claim that increased surveillance is a serious contravention of human rights. Is the way we are now constantly surveilled a step too far?

No, surveillance has not gone too far Show more Show less

There are many benefits to high levels of surveillance - it keeps the country safe.
(1 of 3 Positions) Next >

Taking away surveillance is taking away jobs

A wide range of people have careers in surveillance. If surveillance was decreased, many people would lose their jobs.
< Previous (2 of 3 Arguments) Next >


Surveillance has given thousands of people jobs, and without it they would be affected

The Argument

From security guards to military personnel, surveillance has become a popular and fast growing line of work to pursue. Whether you're improving existing strategies or keeping the public safe, there are many opportunities and many would be without a job if it were to be eradicated. Occupations such as night guards, law enforcement and government agencies in certain countries are expected to grow significantly by 2028. Surveillance is a large part of their job, more so each year, due to the escalating need of public safety. When it comes to defense and jobs revolving around bringing justice, we live in a world where the safety of everyday citizens rely on specific surveillance methods. Without those, we would truly be in the dark and possibly in danger. Many people are involved in this area of labor and they are trained and skilled in using these specific skills. It takes only seconds to collect the information you need from a video, versus finding a suspect with little to no evidence. Loss of surveillance would make these legal processes longer and more difficult.

Counter arguments

Skills in this department are quite transferable, therefore it should not be difficult for those who work in surveillance to find a new job. The STEM field is growing rapidly, as are human resource positions, which can be applied to the social aspect with a specialty in surveillance.



[P1] Surveillance as a job has grown significantly, so it is necessary to many people's income. [P2] Average citizens benefit from those who work in surveillance.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] Regardless of the consequences of those currently employed, it is both inappropriate and unnecessary to monitor others.


Do you agree?

Sign up or log in to record your thoughts on this argument.

Further Reading


    Explore related arguments

    This page was last edited on Friday, 27 Mar 2020 at 14:51 UTC