
Guns are used in many different ways: hunting, skeet, target practice, and unfortunately crimes. My favorite is hunting. Although I have only been hunting a short time, I have been interested in guns my whole life. It started with BB gun fights in South Carolina at my uncle's house with my cousins. As I learned about how BB guns work and how to properly use them, I was able to keep up with my cousins. In high school, I joined the air rifle team in NJROTC.  This team specifically taught me how to sight in and shoot with precision. I started competing my first year on the team. After just one competition, I realized I was more than just good. I soon had a growing desire to shoot a real gun. Many people told me that shooting an air rifle was not the same thing. If I was good at one, I may not be good at the other. Boy, were they wrong. The first time I held a gun in my hand, my first doe was at the receiving end. I dropped the doe in one shot. Soon after that shot, I realized I was an adrenaline junky and in love with the sport. Considering this sport consists of a gun, anyone who participates must be disciplined and precise. One wrong move can end in injury or death. Guns are not always used for fun. They are widely the main cause of crimes. Although banning guns reduces crimes, other methods of gun control such as stricter permits decreases crime rates more. Many people think that banning guns will decrease the amount of crimes. Banning guns will do nothing to stop criminals from committing crimes; they always find a way to get their hands on illegal items, for example, drugs. I agree that criminals should not be allowed to have guns. However, I do not agree that banning firearms is the answer. 

There are many ways to reduce crime without taking away our right to have a gun. Many states immediately revert to taking away gun rights and banning guns. States like " ... Massachusetts, [have] had 3.4 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people ...  [while] Louisiana," not passing many gun laws, " ... had 18 deaths per 100,000 individuals," (Alcindor, n.p.). This clearly shows that the gun laws are working; however, people do not take into account the different populations of the cities or their difference in crime rate. Many people who are against guns just want to do away with them; hence, why the government jumps straight to banning them. Busy cities such as Chicago may have a better outcome with passing stricter gun laws than smaller cities such as Kennesaw, Georgia. However, "[a] study ... found that laws requiring universal background checks and permits to purchase firearms were most clearly associated with decreasing rates of gun related homicides and suicides" (Alcindor, n.p.). This system has made a significant impact in reducing gun related crimes in many different cities. This is not the only thing that can help reduce gun related crimes. Instead of passing a law that bans all guns, the government should reduce the chance of crimes by giving gun safety courses in schools, ensure that gun owners are mentally stable and competent, and make sensible gun laws, for instance banning high capacity magazines. These are just a few things the government can do to contribute to decreasing crime rate without completely banning guns. Even though many people believe gun laws are effective, they were not in one particular city. In 1981, Morton Grove, Illinois, was the first city to pass a law banning the possession of a firearm. This law was active for one year and then deemed unconstitutional. Although it didn't survive because it was unconstitutional, the crime rates were not as low as the government hoped for. Even though this law was passed more than three decades ago, it makes a great point that if the ban didn't work when there were less guns, how do we expect it to work when guns are more prevalent today. The United States is not the only country that banning guns does not work. Russia had very strict gun laws that were successfully enforced by their state police. This did not stop the state from posting murder rates that far exceeded the rest of the world. In some cities, gun bans just do not work. In Kennesaw, Georgia, the law states, "every head of household ... is required to maintain a firearm together with ammunition ... " (Code of Ordinances, n.p.). The people of Kennesaw have lived with this law for so long that it has become a way of life. The residents feel safer since they have a weapon to defend themselves if need be. It also helps the police officers out because the crime rate is lower. Even though the crime rate was already low in Kennesaw, it dropped 29% since the law enforcing ownership of a gun. This law also decreases the temptation to commit robbery considering no one wants to willingly get shot. Clearly, banning guns is not the most effective way to decreasing crimes. 

Many people do not realize what would happen if guns were banned for good. In the Scientific American Journal, Franklin Zimring explained that knives can cause just as much damage as guns. People do not realize that "compared [to] assaults with guns, attacks with knives were more likely to result in multiple wounds, and they were equally likely to damage a part of the body where death can result," (Zimrig, pg. 3) Knives are not only easier to get but cheaper as well. Also if guns were completely banned, criminals will still get their hands on them. Banning guns means no one can use them. Famous people and the president will either be hypocrites or dead because they did not have any decent weapon to defend themselves with. Ted Nugent, a musician and gun enthusiast, says, "I believe that a person's moral compass can be determined by how he references free men the right to defend themselves," (Smith, n.p.). Situations can be avoided with guns. There is a commercial with a young girl sitting at home by herself. An older man, three times her size, knocks on her door once. She goes to look who is there and sees no one. He knocks a second time. She looks again. No one. She then goes to her bedroom and loads her handgun. She takes it to the living room with her and sits back on the couch. The man starts to break down the door. The young girl takes her stance in front of the door as if she will take a shot. The door breaks down and the man is staring down the barrel of the gun. He passes out. He wakes up being hand cuffed in the back of a cop car. If this young woman did not have a gun she would have been seriously hurt. Some people might say, "She could have used a knife." Although knives are useful for defense, they can easily be taken. Also to hurt someone with a knife, you need to be close to them whereas a gun you can shoot from a distance and then run for safety. People normally overlook the positive and inflate the negative. They do not take into consideration that "guns have prevented an estimated of 2.5 million crimes a year ... " (Smith, n.p.).They have also prevented about 400,000 life threatening crimes a year. Claiming that guns cause crimes is the same as saying spoons make people fat. We know that is not true. The commercial is just one instance that a gun had saved someone's life. This is a perfect example as to why we should not ban guns completely but make it harder for criminals to use them against innocent people.

What people do not take into consideration is how many illegal guns are used to commit crimes. Obviously the police do not know which guns are illegal or registered.  Even if we ban guns, criminals will find a way to get them. A great example is the prohibition. The government made the sale, possession, and consumption of alcohol illegal. People still made it, sold it, and consumed it. Back then, the penalty for committing a crime was worse than today. The best thing we can do to minimize the amount of gun related crimes is educate. "65% of juvenile offenders tend to own three or more illegal weapons and firearms," (Ingraham, n.p.). It all starts with kids being influenced by adults. They learn bad habits whether it be with guns or even drugs. That can be changed. If the government provides gun education classes for middle schoolers, it will influence them for the better and may even influence the adults in their lives. Educating children on guns will reduce the number of crimes, reduce the number of people going to jail for gun related incidents in the long run, and reduce then number of kids going to juvenile detention because they were not careful with firearms. Many accidental shootings are caused by children who find guns and do not know how to properly use them. Most do not even know what it is. In 2015, "at least 265 children under the age of eighteen picked up a firearm and accidentally shot themselves or someone else ... " (Ingraham, n.p.). Education would have been able to reduce the number of deaths caused. In the long run, it would benefit everyone without having to take away our second amendment rights. 

Although there are grocery stores everywhere, guns provide for people. Some can be a source of a family's livelihood. Some people do not live close to a grocery store or cannot afford to buy meat for a full family. My uncle's friend would hunt every deer season to put food on the table. Buying ammunition was cheaper than buying meat every week. Two full grown deer would get him and his family through an entire year. That was one less thing he had to worry about. Also since some people do not want to clean their meat, they take it to a processor, who will do it for them. If people do not use guns to hunt, the processor will have less business and could even go out of business. Aside from the processors losing their business, many families also make it a tradition for a father and son to hunt together whether it is duck, turkey, or deer. As the father gets older, the son carries on the tradition of hunting and providing for the family. Because this is a tradition, the kids of this man will grow up respecting firearms. They will also learn to handle them with respect and discipline. Some kids growing up hunting or using firearms properly will make it into the Olympics. Surprisingly shooting has been in the Olympics since 1986. It is a very popular sport that many people have taken pride in for decades. Taking away guns would be the same as taking away a families tradition and livelihood. 

Guns in general are a touchy subject considering it all depends on the person and their opinion. Certain instances, such as mass murders, have caused people to think that guns cause crimes. They do not take into consideration that maybe the person had a mental illness or that if they owned and had a gun that they could have stopped the shooting. It is all about perspective. Education is also a big part of weapons being misused. Many incidents happen because children find guns and are unaware of the dangers. Educating children will decrease the amount of gun accidents and hopefully make them understand how dangerous guns are and deter them from crimes in the future. Even banning guns completely will not keep people and their children safe because there are different weapons used to commit crimes such as knives. People do not realize how effective and helpful guns are. They do not look at the positive only the negative. Although people think banning guns will be the best option to reduce gun related crimes, there are alternate options for all of the problems involving guns that would be more helpful than getting rid of guns all together. 

