To the anti-gun mind, the phrase “more guns mean more crime” is taken as gospel. No amount of evidence to the contrary can be considered lest ye be guilty of heresy.

Of course, this thinking is often parroted in the media. That’s not surprising since most in the media have a clear anti-gun bias. However, most have the good sense to at least assume the guns have to be sold to someone before they can become a public menace.

For John Gregg, a news editor at the Valley News, that’s apparently not even a requirement to try and make the link.

Now, there’s no reason to even mention the Ruger factory unless you’re trying to link the two. When the city of Albany, Georgia (my hometown) was the murder capital of the United States, no one said, “There have been X murders this year in Albany. Albany is also the home of the Bob’s Candies factory.” No one said it because the two facts are completely unrelated.

My friend, Kimberly Morin, wrote about this over at Granite Grok:

What does a manufacturing company, regardless of what they manufacture, have to do with how the population behaves? That was a rhetorical question, the answer is simple, NOTHING. He doesn’t even state if Ruger firearms were used in any of the shootings. Even if they were, the shootings still having literally NOTHING to do with Ruger Manufacturing.

If Gregg’s correlation were even plausible then Chicago’s South Side would have about 100 gun manufacturers. Or maybe in cities and towns where there are food manufacturers, the towns have an insane obesity problem. Or maybe that would be spoon and fork makers. Take your pick.

Gregg is, as do all anti-gunners, blaming an inanimate object on the ACTIONS of human beings. He doesn’t bother to think about what’s actually going on in Newport that would potentially see a spike in gun crimes, like, ummmm, say, drugs.

Precisely.

Look, there’s a lot of factors that go into violent crime, especially murders. There’s also no one cause for murder. Some are domestic violence. Others are drug-related. Still others are tied to other causes. There aren’t any simple answers.

Unless, of course, you’re Gregg.

In fairness, Gregg did try to claim that guns are a big part of the community and he was simply questioning whether that made the community safer. I don’t believe him, mind you, but he did make that claim and I feel obligated to share that claim.

Of course, the fact that those guns aren’t owned by anyone except Ruger and thus aren’t available for being used indicates that those guns could hardly represent any kind of problem in Newport. None at all.

Further, just because there’s a factory in town, it doesn’t mean the town is all about guns. Manufacturing only accounts for about 20 percent of all employment in Newport. Even if Ruger was the only factory (spoiler: it isn’t), it would be debatable if that would be enough to influence a town into making guns a big part of the community as Gregg alleges.

What we’re seeing here is nothing more than another anti-gun journalist trying to make a leap and blame guns and gun manufacturers for their communities’ problems. However, Gregg may want to be careful. Even of Ruger isn’t the only factory in town, it’s probably the biggest. Make life too annoying for them and they may just pick up roots and head for friendlier communities.

I don’t think the city of Newport, NH would thank Gregg for that one, nor for the violent crime that pops up in a community that’s hurting economically.