1. What Is A Voluntary Response Sample Generally Not Suitable For Statistical Study?

The population sampled due to its specific nature i.e., college students, and college graduates would need to be contemplated in regards to the testing results as it is offered as a depiction of the general population.

The researchers used purposive sample but did not give any explanation as to why this choice sampling was made. It is essential to describe the sampling process in a research where this facilitates the reader to distinguish any bias in the whole sampling process. In studies using participants, the process of how to select, access, inform and retain research participants requires considerable thought. Sampling is a key issue, because it is

We had to admit it is true somehow, too many mass shooting happened, the data from FBI uniform crime reports shows that more than half of total numbers of murder victims by weapon form 2008 to 2012 were caused by firearms, especially by guns1. This is one of the main reason why is there so many pro-gun control activist. They firmly believe that gun control would worked very well because it worked at other countries. But I have example contradict that opinion, one of example is Britain, in Britain, it seems impossible for citizens to get a firearm easily. So does it mean gun control successes? We need some statistic to prove this, according to the statistics of murder and homicide rates before and after gun bans, “After the ban, clearly homicide rates bounce around over time, but there is only one year where the homicide rate is lower than it was in 1996. The homicide rate only began falling when there was a large increase in the number of police officers during 2003 and 2004. Despite the huge increase in the number of police, the murder rate still remained slightly higher than the immediate pre-ban rate2.” This data definitely overthrows what the gun control activist expected, particularly the murder rate are even higher than before gun banned. In the table of the Harvard study report, the data clearly shows that Finland have highest ownership in the country listed, but there is only 0.87% of murder rate with guns3. This proved once again that guns are just

Another factor that has been brought up several times is the gun laws and how they contribute to the rates of homicide. I know you’ve heard the old saying, “guns don’t kill people, people with guns kill people.” This statement has been argued both ways and there is no real information to support the claim

We should also take into consideration the adverse effect that gun ownership can have on crimes being committed. Guns in the hands of prospective victims of violence can deter criminal attempts, thus having a violence-reducing effect. Armed victims can also disrupt crimes, which suggest again that widespread civilian gun ownership can in certain instances deter criminals from attempting crimes in the first place. For example, a potential burglar might reconsider going through with the crime if he or she is aware that the population is armed.

Researchers at the University of Alabama have conducted studies trying to find links between guns and mass shootings (Michaels). There are hundreds of millions of guns in circulation in America today. In fact, “the total number of guns in circulation is at least 240 million” (Ballaro and Finley). Adam Lankford, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of Alabama, suggests that “America’s high rate of public mass shootings is connected with the number of guns circulating in the country” (Michaels). Implementing stricter gun laws would cause fewer people to want to purchase guns, resulting in fewer guns in circulation in the coming years. In the United States, “around 30,000 people die from gun fire each year. Around half of these are murders, a little less than half are suicides, and the rest are lethal accidents” (Ballaro and Finley). (2) Currently there are several million guns in circulation, and gun deaths in America are higher than any other developed country. (5) If the trend continues, the number of gun deaths will continue to increase. As stated in the article “10 Pro-Gun Myths, Shot Down.” author Dave Gilson states that “People with access to more guns tend to kill more people- with guns. States with higher gun ownership rates have higher gun murder rates- as much as 114% higher than states with lower gun ownership rates” (Gilson). (7) More

If more guns does not indicate an increase in levels of violence, then what can be attributed to this relationship? According to Dudler, Cantor, and de Moore (2007), blaming a weapon for a crime is an illogical solution to the issue of gun violence. Furthermore,

In an article written in Forbes magazine it shows the myths and true statistics that the gun control lobbyist wouldn’t like you to know. This article and the stats show that the national violent crime rates that had climbed for 30 years from the early 1960s to 1990, fell drastically in 1993 with the increase of citizens purchasing fire arms. In December 2010 the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported that murder and other violent crimes rates fell again significantly by 6.4%. a study done

The last few weeks we covered descriptive statistic: the central tendency, variability, correlation and Z-score. Today’s session is a little bit different, we will be talking about statistical significance. Statistical significance is the level of risk one is willing to take to reject or accept a null hypothesis while it is true and it separate random error from systematic error. When doing a study or research, the statistical significance shows that the difference obtained were not caused by chance. Inferential statistics, the T-test, partition noise from bias by studying a random sample than the population in which we are interested and from the results we infer. The advantage of using sample than a population, it is convenient, saves time, energy and money because n is smaller than population and above all it helps to control systematic and random errors. When we are making a conclusion, we should have a certain confidence or probability of being right and that is called the alpha level; which the risk you are willing to

According to Dr. John R. Lott Jr, world recognized economist, this is not the case at all. Lott holds a Ph.D in economics from the University of California of Los Angeles has rigorgously decidated to finding the correlation between violence and guns within the United States. According to this findings “Consealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States” several misconceptions where cleared in a scienfic manner. First, the number of consealed handgun permits are increasing each year. Just within the past 2015 year, 1.7 million additional permits were issued. This has resulted in a 15.4% increase in permits within one calendar year. Where John R. Lott Jr. makes a distinction in his research center, that although permits are increasing, this does not neccesarily mean that violence is increasing as well. To the contrary belief violence is decreasing at a significant rate. Just between the years of 2007 and 2014 murder rates have fallen to an dismounting rate of 4.2 per 100,000 people. Looking at both variables closely this has represented a 25% drop in overall murder rate while the percentage of permits have increased at a rate of 175%. This provides a basis that lets concerned families, verterans and students that the possession of Firearms is not a direct correlation to violence within

Gun control activists have a tendency to use the mantra that more guns means more deaths. Gun control activists will also point out to the U.S. murder rate and compare it to England’s as further proof. However, the mantra that more guns means more death has been proven to be patently false when compared to multiple European countries, where there is no direct correlation between gun ownership and murder rate (Kates & Mauser, n.d., p652). Furthermore, Kates & Mauser (n.d., p653) went on to show that there is actually a negative correlation between firearm concentration and violent crimes. Ehrenfreund & Godlfarb (2015) referenced a study conducted in 2011 by an economist named Richard Florida, using a graphic he made created showing states with tighter gun laws had fewer gun related deaths per capita. This has also been refuted by the research of Kates & Mauser where it was

As far as overall gun violence is concerned, according to the FBI's 1998 Uniform Crime Reports, the overall violent crime rate in the US decreased about 7%. Robbery alone declined by 11%, the lowest since 1969. In addition, murder dropped by 7%, the lowest since 1967. More significantly, despite the fact the number of firearms and handguns owned by individual Americans continued to increase from 1997-1998, the FBI also reported the rate of firearms used to commit murder and robberies decreased in 1998. (1998 Uniform Crime Reports). These facts conclusively prove that firearms owned by peaceable citizens do not lead to increased murder or violent crime rates. In fact, they demonstrate that armed citizens lead to reduced rates of violent crime. When the gun is in the hands of a well-rounded person, it is no more of a weapon than your every day curling iron.

Further, despite the fact that gun ownership in the U.S. increased enormously during the 1990’s, there was a consistent, dramatic reduction of criminal violence. In fact, homicide and violent crime have plunged over the last 15 years. Considering that 18 of 25 countries surveyed had an increase of violent crime, America’s large decline is impressive. Moreover, Norway, Finland, Germany, France, and Denmark also have a high rate of private gun ownership, and the murder rates in these countries are as low as or lower than developed nations with less gun ownership (Kates & Mauser, 2007).

There are 3000 students at my school. For this experiment, I decided that using a sample size of 40 students will be feasible and fairly representative of the entire population. In order to try and insure that this sample best represents the school, it is important to carefully choose a sampling method which decreases any chance of bias. Originally, I wanted to use a simple random sample which would give everyone in the school an equal chance of being chosen, therefore making the results fair and not directed towards a certain group of individuals. However, getting a hold of a list of all students in the school that I can use to randomly select my sample group was not realistic. So, I decided that a voluntary response sample would be more practice in this situation. Not only does using this sample make the process less time consuming and convenient, but it also solves the problem of not being

Terrorism victims can be decreased by establishing more strict gun laws. Mass murders using automatic weapons is unfortunately becoming a common occurrence in our society and is labeled as a form of terrorism. Americans possess approximately two thirds of the guns present throughout the entire globe (Karmen 461). If these laws were better executed, then the likelihood of these terrorist attacks from occurring would decrease. On the other hand, if guns were banned overall, the rates of terrorist attacks