pw7

docx

School

University of California, Davis *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by PrivateCrabPerson226

Gina Salvato PHIL 5 3/5/2023 Questions: Q1: Science Vs. Guns, the podcast episode assigned in this week's module, sets out to investigate three questions: a. How often are guns successfully used in self-defense? b. How often are guns used for 'bad' purposes? c. What is the effect of gun ownership on overall crime rates? In your own words, what answer does host Wendy Zukerman and her team arrive at regarding each of these questions? Regarding question a, the team found that the actual number of defensive gun uses (DGUs) is difficult to determine because it is not always reported to the police. However, based on available data, the team estimated that the number of DGUs is much lower than the 2.5 million figure often cited by gun rights advocates. Regarding question b, the team found that guns are often used for bad purposes such as homicides, suicides, and accidental shootings. They also found that the presence of a gun in a household increases the risk of suicide and homicide. Regarding question c, the team found that the relationship between gun ownership and crime rates is complex and inconclusive. While some studies suggest that more guns lead to more crime, others suggest the opposite. Q2: Zukerman describes a study done by Gary Kleck that concludes that there are 2.5 million defensive uses of guns per year in the United States. Put Gary's argument into the generalization form you learned about this week by filling in the blank premises below: Premise 1: Gary Kleck's study concludes that there are 2.5 million defensive uses of guns per year in the United States. Premise 2: There are no significant errors in Kleck's study. --- Conclusion: 2.5 million adult Americans use guns for self-defense each year. Q3: Do you find this generalization cogent? Using the specific evaluative questions relevant for inductive generalizations (found in section 6.2 of our e-textbook), say why or why not. Whether this generalization is cogent depends on the answers to several evaluative questions. For example:

Is the sample size of Kleck's study representative of the entire population? Was the study conducted in a way that minimized bias and error? Were the survey questions designed in a way that accurately captures DGUs? Are there other studies that confirm or refute Kleck's findings? Without answers to these questions, it is difficult to determine the cogency of Kleck's generalization. Q4: Zuckerman introduces the "National Crime Victimization Survey", which she claims is more reliable than Kleck's study. She offers 2 reasons why she believes the generalization of this study is more reliable. What are those two reasons? Do you agree that this survey is more reliable than Kleck's? What makes you say that? Zuckerman argues that the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is more reliable than Kleck's study because it is conducted by the government and is based on a large representative sample. She also argues that the survey questions are more carefully designed to capture DGUs. I agree that the NCVS is likely more reliable than Kleck's study because it has been subjected to more scrutiny and is based on a larger sample. However, I would also note that the NCVS has limitations, such as underreporting of DGUs. Q5: What was something that you found interesting in the podcast? Explain it here (with a timestamp if possible) and say why you selected this particular aspect of the podcast. Note that "interesting" can mean lots of things - funny, informative, outrageous, irritating, etc. Just pick something that stood out to you. One aspect of the podcast that I found interesting was the discussion of the "guns make you safer" myth, which begins around 17:50. The team cites several studies that suggest that the presence of a gun in a household actually increases the risk of homicide and suicide, rather than decreasing it as many gun rights advocates claim. I have personally been affected by gun violence. My boyfriend at the time, committed suicide using his own illegally purchased handgun. He had bought it for “self-protection”. When the police were called to our apartment, I was told that most handguns kill their owners rather than provide any sort of protection. I, being the one who had not only been in the apartment at the time it occurred but also had been the one to find him, realize how quickly one’s life can end with a single bullet. When I close my eyes and think about him it is hard to imagine anything but the last few moments of his life. His suicide has also made me realize that suicide does not end with their death. It begins a new cycle of pain and questions that are to be never answered, for all their loved ones.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

pw7

Related Documents