Wintemute et al
Wintemute et al (2010) presented an article critique on the ‘The Effect of Gun Shows on Gun-Related Deaths: Evidence from California and Texas’ by Duggan et. al (2005). In his article Wintemute has criticized the article written by Duggan, with justifications based on further research that exposes the weaknesses of Duggan’s claim that gun shows do not cause homicide. Through a logical analysis of the design, methodology, data and the conclusions of the research article, Wintemute was able to prove that the findings of the research article were invalid and not based on authentic and relevant data.
The purpose of this article critique is to analyse the criticisms presented by Wintemute on the research findings of Duggan et al and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of his article and the validity of his research findings.
Review of Literature:
Relevant literature has been presented by Wintemute in order to in-validate the claim made by Duggan et al. Wintemute proved that Duggan’s claims that most of the gun homicide incidents took place within 25 miles of the vicinity and within the first few weeks of the gun purchase, was invalid and through the presentation of the relevant data proved that gun homicides took place, outside the state from where it was purchased and there was no validation that the gun was used only during the first few weeks of the purchase.
Wintemute was able to prove that the sample population selected on the basis of area code was not adequate and Duggan’s previous research based on census was more accurate, a sample 236 gun shows was not accurate and neither was the aspect that more retailers attended larger shows given due weight age by Duggan in his research. However, Wintemute could also have used more graphs and tabular charts to prove that the data was presented in a manner that made the findings of the research inadequate and biased.
Wintemute et al (2010) proved that that data analysis was done in such a manner that Duggan et al had only a 10 % chance of finding a plausible relationship between homicide and guns purchased at gun shows. Therefore the analysis was biased and the findings of the research invalid.
Wintemute could have used the conclusion to validate the main points of his research findings in the article. However, the article was biased towards merely proving Duggan’s research as invalid. Further research data and analysis could have given the reader information, as to the singular points of purchase of guns and how they can be made more inaccessible to the public, which would resulted in lesser gun homicides in the United States.
List of References:
The references have been properly presented in the APA format. Data and literature from the year 2004- 2009 was analysed, which further strengthen the Wintemute’s claims as to the research findings.
Wintemute et al could have carried out a further analysis of the data provided in other sources to prove that most of the guns bought at private exhibitions and through illegal means were first presented at game shows, this aspect could have been analysed further. Wintemute also claimed that most of the gun homicides took place at locations beyond 25 miles as presented by Duggan et al but no data was further analysed to validate this claim.
Duggan M., & Jacob, B. A. (2005). The Effect of gun shows on gun suicides, accidental gun deaths and gun violence. College Park, MD: University of Maryland.Available at: http://econ-server.umd.
Wintemute, D., Hemenway, D., Webster, D., Pierce, G., & Braga, (2010). A gun shows and gun violence: Fatally flawed study yields misleading results. American Journal of Public Health, 100(10), 1856-1860. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2010.191916 .