For this 'discuss both views and give your opinion' essay, dedicate one full body paragraph to the view that technology reduces crime, and a separate, equally developed paragraph to the view that it encourages criminals. Avoid presenting your personal opinion until the conclusion, ensuring both perspectives are explored neutrally and thoroughly in the main body.

When discussing how technology reduces crime, consider examples like advanced CCTV networks with facial recognition, sophisticated digital forensics for evidence collection (e.g., DNA analysis in the UK), or predictive policing algorithms used in some US cities. For technology encouraging crime, focus on the rise of cyber-criminality (phishing, ransomware attacks), the use of encrypted communication by criminal organizations, and the dark web facilitating illicit trade.

The most common mistake students make on this question is discussing technology's general pros and cons without explicitly linking them to crime reduction or encouragement. To avoid this, ensure every point and example you provide directly addresses how technology either deters criminal activity or, conversely, empowers criminals and creates new avenues for crime.

To effectively transition between the two opposing views, use clear contrasting linking phrases. For instance, after discussing crime reduction, you could begin the next body paragraph with phrases like 'Conversely,' 'However, an alternative perspective posits that,' or 'While the aforementioned points highlight technology's deterrent effect, it is equally important to consider its role in fostering criminal enterprise.'

For a band 8-9 answer to this specific question, examiners look for a nuanced discussion that avoids oversimplification, demonstrating a deep understanding of the complex interplay between technology and crime. This includes using precise, topic-specific vocabulary, presenting well-developed arguments supported by relevant examples, and offering a clear, logically justified personal opinion that synthesizes the preceding discussion, rather than just repeating points.