This Rutgers “study” is pure propaganda.  They chose New York as one example of a “strict gun laws” state, because it had a much lower crime rate during NYC’s “stop and frisk” policy – which just happened to coincide with the years of their study.  Unbelievably, they chose Iowa as a “strict gun laws” state!  Iowa is anything but such a state.  It does not license gun owners, nor register guns, nor have storage requirements.  Furthermore, Iowa is a “shall issue” concealed carry state that honors permits from many other states.  The worst thing one can say about the state is that it requires a permit to purchase a handgun.  Why did they bypass Illinois and pick Iowa?  Because Illinois has strict gun laws and an astronomical crime rate.

For the “lax gun laws” states, they chose Louisiana and Arkansas.  Having spent a great deal of time in the FBI’s online data site, I immediately recognized that these two states are outliers among 2nd Amendment friendly states, with high crime rates.  In fact, Louisiana has the highest crime state of the 40 plus 2A friendly states.

So, to sum up, Rutgers picked one of the best states with strict gun laws, that had stop and frisk and a state with fairly permissive gun laws as representing “strict gun laws” states.  They then picked the very worst state among the pro-2A states, along with one of the worst of these states to represent “lax gun laws” states.

It seems clear that Rutgers had the result in mind before they started…..