013-Transcript

Just Right Episode 013

Air Date: July 12, 2007

Great Lakes Guns and Knives | Jim Montag

Created using AI. Errors may be present.

Disclaimer
The views expressed in this program are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of 94.9 CHRW.

Clip (Star Trek: A Private Little War)
This is the hammer. The hammer striking the pan causes a spark, ignites the powder and fires the flintlock. Now, aim it as I showed you. Hold your breath and squeeze the trigger gently. Very, very, very, Jim. I want to talk to you. Not here, Bones. In the cave. Your turn. Your turn.

(Music plays.)

Fade into color, color into black and white. Under the bedclothes, everything will be alright.

Bob Metz
It is Thursday, July the 12th. I’m Bob Metz and this is Just Right on CHRW 94.9 FM, where we will be with you from now till noon. No, no, not right wing. Just right.

Good morning. I’ve never owned one. I’ve never possessed one, nor do I hope to ever need one, but I do believe that I and every other law-abiding citizen has a right to own one.

And of course, what I’m talking about is the right to own a gun as a weapon of self-defense. Welcome to the show. This is Just Right. You’re listening to CHRW, where you can join in on the conversation by simply calling 519-661-3600. I am joined in studio today by guest Jim Montag, who I mentioned a week or two ago. Jim, many of you know as the president of the London-Middlesex Taxpayer’s Coalition, as a past candidate for mayor in the City of London, and what you might not know about Jim is that he also operates Great Lakes Guns and Knives, which is sort of a traveling… How would you describe it, Jim?

Jim Montag
It’s a gun and knife military show put on about eight times a year. And it has many, many things in there. Guns, knives, military equipment, badges, medals, uniforms, some very historic items and some modern items. And we get a bit of fishing equipment and stuff like that in there. Just a general interest show for people that are interested in hunting and fishing.

Bob Metz
Yeah. Now by show, what you mean by show, it’s sort of like a flea market, isn’t it, a bit? Or are there actual displays and events?

Jim Montag
Well, there’s usually 100 to 150 tables at each show, occupied sometimes one person per table, sometimes people at five or six per table. And things are to be sold, purchased or traded.

Bob Metz
Now, you’ve been doing this for many years now. I’ve known you for years. You certainly know a lot about guns of all types, because you’re dealing with them in a…

Almost as a… You’re the host of this show. You see all kinds of people trading things. What kind of people are into guns? Are they the dangerous types we seem to hear about all the time? What kind of people come to your shows?

Jim Montag
The people that come to the shows you never hear about, because they’re not the type to get into any violent crime or any criminal activities whatsoever. And for one of our exhibitors or guests to be charged with an offense is extremely rare.

Bob Metz
And what would you attribute that to?

Jim Montag

Cause they were stupid or something.

Bob Metz
Well, we certainly have been talking a lot about the whole gun control issue. Would you say the issue is dead in Canada or is it still very much alive? Because it’s almost as if…

Jim Montag
Well, it’s very much alive because the anti-gun people just will never quit, never cease.

Bob Metz
But haven’t they won already?

Jim Montag
No, they have won a few things, but not really. They haven’t outlawed all guns yet, like they have in England, which is what they’re trying to do. But fortunately they haven’t been able to do that yet, and likely will not be able to do it.

Bob Metz
Now, so how far is Canada down the road to ending the debate one way or the other? Do you think it’ll ever swing back? I’ve been looking at all this information, all the articles. It certainly does not seem to indicate statistically that gun control has any positive effects on society.

In fact, quite the opposite, which we’ll get into in a little more detail later. But it must be making it difficult for someone running a gun show like yours to even operate. I’m surprised there’s that many people still able to buy, sell, trade, and deal in collectibles, guns, and… Are there any real weapons there?

Jim Montag
Well, yeah, there’s sometimes very modern hunting rifles there. But in order to buy, sell, and trade, you have to go through quite an extensive learning or training course. You have to pass exams. You have to get a possession and acquisition certificate, which is approved by the police department.

So as soon as you apply for that certificate, you not only go through Justice Canada, but you also go through the Chief Provincial Firearms office in Ontario, plus the local police departments. And the purpose of that is to weed out anybody that has ever been convicted of any violent crime, or that is a habitual criminal. You never want those type of people having guns. And also they check for people that are mentally disturbed. And I think doctors are obligated to report somebody that is considered mentally dangerous to the general population. And so you have to go through all this, and then if everything checks out okay, then you can buy, sell, and trade.

Bob Metz
So then your average gun owner, collector, the law-abiding type… Most of them I’ve heard, they certainly support strict laws against people who use guns in violent crimes. They seem to be some of the strongest supporters of laws in that direction, even though they own guns themselves.

Jim Montag
Well, yes, they would definitely agree now, at the present time, that the sentences given prisoners or people for violent crimes are far too lenient. And also they let these guys out on bail. We have a case right here in London where the man was charged with attempted murder. He was released on bail and he disappeared.

Now, if he’s that violently inclined, he should never, ever be released on bail. And all the lawful gun owners pretty well agree with the restrictions that are in place so far. The one they don’t like is registering of long guns. But we’ve had registering of pistols or handguns since 1934, and nobody really objects to that. And it’s not really a problem to a collector or to a target shooter.

Bob Metz
Now, that kind of registration, when it originally occurred back in the 30s, it didn’t prohibit guns as such, did it? It merely… you could still have a right to own a gun as long as you registered it.

Unless you had… there was some reason that you fell into one of those other categories you mentioned.

Jim Montag
Yeah, that’s right.

Bob Metz
And so that type of registration is different. You know, you’re dealing with this issue and I know you deal with the irrationalities of government filings and all this stuff with all the gun issues and the registration of guns. What is the perceived problem?

Like, looking at it as you hear it from, say, the other camp, the camp that’s in favor of gun control. What are they so afraid of? And why do they not accept what appears to be an overwhelming amount of evidence showing the contrary of their belief?

Jim Montag
Well, the coalition against gun control, they keep coming up with the same argument again and again and again. And they have been proven wrong many, many…

Bob Metz
You mean the coalition for gun control?

Jim Montag
Yeah, they have been proven wrong many, many times, and they will not listen to reason. And when you consider that some of their jobs rely on this and they’re very well paid with nice offices and government grants and everything else, you can see why they carry on in this fashion. But what they’re really doing is deceiving the public.

They are broadcasting or publicizing information that is incorrect and when they do find out something that is correct, they just hide it. It just goes away. And this is what’s happening. These people are never going to go away.

They have a mindset…

Bob Metz

So what are they afraid of? What are they after? Is it really the guns they’re after, you think, or are they after something else?

Jim Montag

Well, almost all of them are very left-leaning people. And whenever you have a left-wing government, you hear an awful lot about restricting or prohibiting guns. And it’s interesting that there never has been a totalitarian government in the world that permitted private ownership of weapons. The first thing they take away is the weapons so that you can’t revolt against their decisions or what they’re trying to do.

Bob Metz
That’s certainly a historical fact. I’m just wondering if we’re heading in that direction today. We always hear how violent the United States is and how peaceful Britain is. As examples of in Britain, they have gun control and in the United States, they don’t have gun control, supposedly, which is not true after a visit both you and I had in the States a few years ago. And we found out how many controls they actually do have. But tell us a little bit about that comparison. There’s Canada, U.S., Britain.

Jim Montag
In England, they have first prohibited handguns, and then you could only have them if you were a target shooter. And then the gun had to be stored in a locked-up facility at the target range. And now they’ve prohibited that, so you can’t even have a handgun of any type. And they’ve also prohibited long guns, shotguns, and rifles. And the only people that can own a shotgun in England today are the landowners that have usually vast tracts of land or big estates. They can get a shotgun, but the average person living in the city of London cannot own any weapons of any kind whatsoever. And the prohibitions in England are becoming worse and worse.

The one result of that is London, England has a higher violent crime rate than any city in the European Union and higher than Istanbul or New York City, which is kind of hard to understand or hard to believe, but that is a fact that came out from Scotland Yard.

Bob Metz
Now, cite where you got that, where that was printed, because a lot of people might think it’s out of some gun magazine.

Jim Montag
That was printed in Maclean’s magazine in June the 11th, 2007, issue. It has quite an article about the decline in England. They say England leads Europe in illiteracy, obesity, divorce, drug use, crime, STDs, and in violent crime in particular.

Bob Metz
Now, can you relate that strictly to guns or is guns just another symptom of the disease?

Jim Montag
If you outlaw guns, you increase crime, and this has been proven many, many times. In the United States, they’re going in the opposite direction. There are more and more states that are permitting people to have a concealed weapon on their person.

They have found that this reduces crime. And the ironic thing is, as a Canadian, I will never under the present government or present system be able to carry a concealed weapon on my person. Yet, I can go to a school here and pass a test and examination and make an application to the state of Utah, and I will be granted a permit to carry a concealed weapon on my person that is valid in 29 United States. Now, in order to get that gun to the border, I have to transport it in a locked container with a trigger lock and have to have a special authority to transport to get it to the border. And as soon as I get to the border, I can take it out of that, I put it in a holster, put it under my coat, and away I go.

Bob Metz
So, it almost seems like as a Canadian, you have more rights in some U.S. states than you do in your home in native land, so to speak?

Jim Montag
Definitely. You definitely have that right. And it’s sort of ironic, but they have found out in these states that if you limit gun control or limit guns, that you will increase crime. And one example of that is…

Bob Metz
Well, hold that thought for a second, Jim. We’ve got to take a break right now. When we come back, we’ll get into some more of those statistics. I know you’ve got some there. You’re listening to CHRW 94.9 FM, where we’re talking about guns and gun control with Jim Montag. 519-661-3600 to call if you have any questions or comments, and we’ll be back right after this.

Clip (Dennis Miller)
Isn’t it time to double-click the refresh icon on the Constitution? How do we even know we’re interpreting it correctly? What if the right to bear arms means you can wear a sleeveless T-shirt? And you know, the National Rifle Association has got to quit jamming this armed militia clause down my throat. I don’t want to do away with the guns, but I think I’m like most of you, we’ve got to tighten it up a little. Let’s at least make it as hard to get a gun license as it is to get a pilot’s license. And you know something, if we can’t agree on that, how’s about this? You’re not allowed to have more guns than you do teeth, okay? Would that be a good first step?

Now for the definition of feedback. The furnishing of data concerning the operation or output of a machine to an automatic control device or to the machine itself.

Station Promo
This is 94.9 CHRW feedback. We have something for everyone from the environment to political issues. Welcome to Green World. I’m Bob Metz and this is Just Right. From arts and entertainment to relationships. I’m Ira Timothy and you’re listening to London Live. This is Jan Saddy and you are listening to Puppy Relationships. We invite you to call in every day during feedback at 519-661-3600. Feedback features a live show every weekday from 11am to 12pm on 94.9 CHRW London’s Indy Station.

Clip (John Stossel – Prisoners love gun control)
The Center for Disease Control recently completed a review of studies of various types of gun control. Waiting periods, registration and licensing, and bans on certain firearms. It could not document that these rules have reduced violent crime. How can this be? Signing the Brady Bill into law, didn’t help?

Don’t tell me this bill will not make a difference, that it’s not true.

Sorry, the government can’t say it has made a difference. One reason is that the bad guys tend to ignore gun laws.

When I had a gun, I didn’t care what laws they had. I’m not worried about the government saying that I can’t carry a gun. I’m gonna carry a gun anyway.

These maximum security felons in New Jersey scoff at measures like the Brady Law.

I’m not going in the store to buy no gun, so I can care less if they had a back ground checking up. I bought it from the street, from a source. There’s guns everywhere.

If you got money, you can get a gun. A study funded by the Department of Justice confirmed what these prisoners said. Most criminals buy their guns illegally and easily. And get this, the studies said the felons say the thing they fear most is not the police, not time in prison, but you. Another American who might be armed.

When you’re gonna rob somebody you don’t know, it makes it harder, because you don’t know what to expect out of them.

Bob Metz
We’re back. You’re back with Just Right. I’m Bob Metz and I’m here with guest Jim Montag, who is talking with me about guns and gun control. If you want to call 519-661-3600. Just before the break, comedian Dennis Miller made a suggestion that it should be at least as hard to get a gun license as it is to get a pilot’s license. Now Jim, isn’t it already just as hard to get a gun license in a lot of places in the States? It certainly is in Canada, right?

Jim Montag
Yeah, in Canada it’s, I would say, harder to get a gun license than almost any other type of license. In the United States, certain states are kind of wide open over there, especially the western and less densely populated states. And other states are very restrictive, but whether they’re very restrictive it doesn’t reduce the crime rate one little bit.

Bob Metz
Well, let’s examine that for a bit. I’ve got some stats here. Just allow me a sec here to go through a few of them. One that got my attention right away, I caught this letter in the London Free Press, this was already June 10th, but written by a fellow named Michael Rora.

And he pointed out an interesting point that I wanted to check out and it proved to be true. And he says in his letter, handguns were banned in the United Kingdom in 1997, although I see other stats that say 95, so that might be within a year or two anyway. When the government sought to put an end to violent crimes, gun crimes totaled 12,410 that year.

Nine years after the ban, the gun crime numbers were 21,521, which is almost double. I have another article here out of the Sportsman editorial by David Tomlinson on describing basically what’s happening in Britain as well. You know, Britain has always touted as land of peace and honey and all that kind of stuff in terms of violent crime.

And he’s literally calling Britain a horror story. Violent crime rates there are the highest in the western world, which you just cited out of Maclean’s magazine, another source, and are getting worse. And as he warrants, he says the Canadian government’s been copying British ideas for dealing with violent crime for the last 50 years. Now what’s interesting, he says they outlawed the possession in 1995, but confirms that Britain has now more handgun crime than ever before.

And he talks about, I found this story kind of interesting. Apparently in Britain there was a British probation officer by the name of David Fraser, who was a probation officer for some 25 years. And he put a lot of criminals on parole, worked with them, and in any case he wrote a book and it was called A Land Fit for Criminals. And he submitted it to over 60 publishers, none of them would publish it because it wasn’t the right kind of book for their list and their ideology. So it wasn’t until the guy himself was stabbed and killed in a murder by a Jamaican immigrant drug dealer with a serious criminal record that finally they decided to publish the book.

And it was quite a revelation. It says here that in his book, and this is a former British probation officer speaking, he says only half of British crime is actually even reported to police. So remember, that means everything you’ve been hearing in terms of stats, just double it if there’s any accuracy to that at all. And he says that British police refused to record about half the crime that is reported to them.

So what are we doing now? Are we quadrupling the real crime rate? And commonly they have a problem with crown prosecutors refusing to prosecute. And so what they’ve done is instead of putting people in jail and issuing fines and penalties, in the year 2000 the home office in Britain reprimanded the West Midlands Police Force for bringing too many arrested criminals into court. So what they recommend is they issue cautions. It’s like a warning.

It’s like getting a warning on your driver’s license or something. But get this, this is what they issue cautions for, and these are stats from the year 2000. They gave cautions for 600 robberies.

Can you imagine a robbery, an armed robbery, and you get a caution for that? For 4,300 car thefts. For 6,600 burglaries. For 13,400 offences against public order. For 35,400 cases of violence against the person. And for 67,600 cases of other kinds of theft. In simple terms, 127,900 offenders in the year 2000 were cautioned but not punished for crimes that amount to robbery, car theft, burglary, public order violence against the person. It’s just stunning that they just basically slapped them on the wrist.

Another fascinating article here I have May 28th, National Post by Lorne Gunter. Blame urban culture, not urban guns, where he takes on Toronto Mayor David Miller for his silly responses to all the shootings that keep going on in Toronto. And he keeps saying, we need more gun control as though what we had isn’t already enough. But again, what he cites here, he says that 2004 meta-analysis by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, and he stresses hardly a gun owner’s lobby, evaluated more than 250 articles from academic journals, nearly 100 books on gun control and more than 40 government studies from around the world, and found no evidence that gun control or gun bans had reduced gun crime, murder, suicide with guns. And in case you’re wondering what’s happening over in Russia where they have a very low incidence of legal gun ownership, something like 4,000 per 100,000 people, they have a murder rate nearly 30 times that of Norway, even though Norwegian civilians own 9 times as many guns as Russian civilians. And of course, it also refers to Britain implementing a near-complete ban on civilian handgun ownership a decade ago, and handgun possession among criminals has soared by an estimated 1 to 3 million guns, and handgun crime has almost tripled.

Now, in the view of all this, Jim, I can go over and over again. Here’s one that you had in an article you wrote back in 1995, violent crime rate, comparing Canada and the United States for the years 1970, from the uniform crime reports for the United States 1991, and Canadian sources crime trends in Canada, which is from the Canadian Center for Justice Statistics. And in every year from 72 to 91 per capita, Canada’s crime rate is higher than the United States. So how have we managed this amazing self-delusion about ourselves? Where does that come from, and how can we ignore so much information?

Jim Montag
Well, word comes from Bob, that there are a number of people, mainly in the Coalition for Gun Control, that keep saying the same thing again and again and again. And I’m reminded by a saying of many years ago, I think by Santa Ana, that if you repeat a lie often enough, it eventually becomes acceptable as the truth. And this apparently is what they’re trying to do, because their arguments, subtle and changed, they just keep going on and on. And it’s the same argument again and again and again, and they’ve been proven wrong, but they just won’t go away. But then, like I said, who wants to go away if you have a nice office and a nice salary paid for by the government?

Bob Metz
Well, you know, it’s interesting, I look at Lorne Gunter’s article here, and he blames, quote, academic theorists, special interest civil rights organizations, feminists, guilty white liberals and multiculturalists who generally disdain guns and lawful gun owners, which is interesting, he stresses lawful gun owners.

Now, what’s funny is, I know I’ve met some feminist groups that feel quite the opposite. They see a gun as an equalizing instrument, as a method of self-defense. But I guess at the center of this is this, and I’ve seen it referred to here, is this moral relativism. This idea of equating right and wrong as equal, bad and good as equal, and all violence is bad. It’s almost like we’re living in the midst of this anti-violence cult, almost, where self-defense is equated with offence. Do you think that’s a part of it?

Jim Montag
Well, what we’re trying to do is take away one of your basic rights, and that is the right to security of person. With some of these gun laws, I’ll take, for example, if you have a gun at home, you have to have it in a locked container or a locked, especially built, locked cupboard or closet, and you have to have a trigger lock on it, and the ammunition has to be stored in a separate place, preferably another room. Now, if somebody is trying to kick in your door in a home invasion in the middle of the night what do you do? Do you tell them to hold on right there while I run into the other room unlock my gun cabinet, take the trigger lock off my gun and then go get some ammunition? And then I can defend myself?

Bob Metz
Well, it’s even worse than that, isn’t it? Aren’t they even now suggesting that we should run and leave the criminal there? In California, I understand they have what they call FLEE laws, and that’s F-L-E-E, not F-L-E-A.

Jim Montag
That was proposed a number of years ago in California, a FLEE law. That meant that if you hear somebody breaking in your front door, you’re supposed to run out the back door, so as not to impede the progress of that criminal.

Now, the gun control people in Canada picked up on that, but they were very quickly shut down because it was really very ludicrous, and they were made to look very foolish, so they quickly forgot about it. But this is the way they’re thinking. The criminal has all the rights and you don’t have any.

Bob Metz
And that’s certainly a perception out there. To me, the fundamental right is the right to own a gun. You said earlier, too, that, you know, a totalitarian government is always a government that will first take away everyone’s right to own a weapon. Right. Are we in danger of government becoming the very bully that it should be protecting us from, would you say?

Jim Montag
Well, sometimes I wonder, especially when the most violent or the most aggressive anti-gun people in political parties is the NDP, which is a socialist party, which to me is not too far off of communism. Now, what kind of a government or country would they like to inflict on us if we did not have the weapons to defy them or not obey them?

Bob Metz
Well, that’s a pretty regular blank out, but we’ll have to come back to that after these messages and we will continue the discussion on the other side of this.

Clip (Firefly – Vera, my very favorite gun)
I wasn’t looking for a fight.

I always do seem to find one though.

Do I have your attention?

Kind of going to extremes here, ain’t I?

There’s times I think you don’t take me seriously. I think that ought to change. Do you think it’s likely to?

You got something you don’t deserve.

And it’s brought me a galaxy of fun. I’m here to tell you.

Six men came to kill me one time. And the best of them carried this. It’s a Callahan full bore auto lock, customized trigger, double cartridge thorough gauge. It is my very favorite gun.

(Chinese) are you offering me a trade?

A trade? Hell, it’s theft. This is the best damn gun made by man. It has extreme sentimental value. It’s miles more worthy than what you got.

What I got. She has a name.

So does this. I call it Vera.

Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.

Clip (Dr. Walter Williams)
Now, if you think I’m being too loose with the terminology in the terminology intimidation threats and coercion, you have April 15th to check me out. You can tell the agents of Congress that you don’t want your earnings going to bail out S&Ls. You don’t want your earnings going to farmers.

You don’t want your earnings going to poor people. You will see all the intimidation, threats and coercion that you want to see. And if you act too rigorously in the defense of what is rightfully yours, you will get shot by the agents of Congress. Now you might say, well, gee, that’s kind of extreme Williams.

Well, just look at the scenario. Suppose I were to tell the agents of Congress, you’re not going to take my money to give to farmers and to S&Ls and to poor people. And what will they say? Well, Williams, we’re going to fine you. I’m going to say I’m not going to pay the fine. It’s my money. They say, well, we’re going to take your house.

I say, no, you’re not. It’s my house. They’re going to send the agents aren’t they loaded with guns and I’m going to be at my window with my guns. Then they’re going to kill me. That’s what’s going to happen.

Bob Metz

And that’s exactly what will happen when you don’t obey the law and you take it far enough. In fact, even people who have withheld their children from going to school have been shot and killed by government agents in the United States in past history.

Welcome back to the show. It’s Just Right. I’m Bob Metz. I’m here with Jim Montag. We’re talking about gun control and guns in general and government in specific in this little section.

You can call 519-661-3600 if you’ve got any comments or questions. And that last commentary there was by Dr. Walter Williams in the United States talking about, you know, government is, I guess, essentially an instrument of force. It is a gun. G is for government and G is for gun. And so I guess we always have to be on guard.

Wouldn’t you say, Jim? Isn’t that always been part of a philosophy of most gun owners and gun owner groups? And I think that almost bothers citizens about such groups.

They think that maybe these groups might be against them because they see that government is theirs. I don’t know. I’m just trying to say I’m thinking out loud right here. Does that make any sense to you or is there some other?

Jim Montag
Well, the people that are anti-gun, usually are people that are going to deny you some of your basic rights and freedoms. And they are trying to inflict their viewpoint, their opinion, and their ideas onto you and into your life.

Bob Metz
Now, do they actually see it that way? Or like maybe what you’re saying is not how they see it. A lot of people say, well, no, guns are dangerous. Guns will do this or that or the other thing. And whether they’re motivated by that motivation, I can certainly see politicians being, but so many people seem to go along with it. It’s almost like the global warming phenomenon.

Jim Montag
Whether they see it that way or not is irrelevant because that is the way it is.

Bob Metz

It has the same effect.

Jim Montag

Yes, it has the same effect. One of the basic principles of freedom is that you should be able to do anything you want to do, providing it does not do harm to anybody else. Now, these people are trying to curtail your freedom. One thing that comes to mind is some of the religious fanatics. They try to convert you to their religion. And they cannot believe that you will not be converted. And if you’re not converted, you’re bad.

You’re wrong. These are very dangerous people. And gun control people are the same thing. They have certain beliefs and they want to convert you to that belief. And if you don’t do it, they consider you as very dangerous.

Bob Metz
And now it’s interesting. I’ve talked to people who support gun control and they might use that very example as the reason to have gun control. I don’t want those dangerous fanatics having guns. And if I keep the guns out of their hands, they won’t have them. And that’s where I think there’s an error in the logic. But nevertheless, it seems logical when you first say it. You know what I’m saying? Experience just doesn’t bear it out.

Jim Montag
You’re quite right. It doesn’t bear it out. And you have basic rights. You have the right to life, liberty, security of person and property. And our present government under past Prime Minister a number of years ago did not include property in the Constitution or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. So you really don’t have any property rights in Canada. And as far as some guns are concerned, some already have been confiscated without compensation.

They have been taken away.

Bob Metz

For what reason?

Jim Montag

Because some bureaucrats decided this was a dangerous weapon that it shouldn’t be in the hands of the general public.

Bob Metz
So it wasn’t in the commission of a crime or anything like that?

Jim Montag
That’s right. These guns were owned by private individuals who never had committed any crime whatsoever. And they were taken away. In the United States, their basic laws are that you can have any weapon that the military has. But in Canada, you cannot do that. It cannot happen here. And really what some people are trying to do is to make you lead your life the way they want you to lead it.

Bob Metz
Now, I’ve got a, this is something that just came to me last night. We haven’t discussed this particular aspect about this. But with all the evidence that seems to be mounting against the effectiveness of gun control, why do we find in our society that the police themselves are still seem to be supporting gun control? Wouldn’t they look at the evidence and say, man, we could use these citizens to be helping us out. But all I ever hear from police representatives is, oh, you shouldn’t own a gun. It’s wrong. It’s wrong. It’s a crime in and of itself just to have a gun. And I guess there’s a greater question should police be lobbying at all.

But maybe that’s a general advantage if these are the way the stats are coming out. And this is what this fellow in England is saying who’s a, who was a probation officer and you just hear it over and over. hat, what’s the resistance? Are they all politics?

Jim Montag
I think as far as the police are concerned, they don’t want you to have the right to defend yourself or to prevent a crime. They want to do it for you. This is job protection. The more police they have, the more effective they can be.

And this is what they’ll tell you. And actually a private citizen has all the same power that a police has for arresting and apprehending and stopping a criminal act.

Bob Metz
But that’s, I was going to ask that, do citizens still have the right to make a citizen’s arrest? Because I haven’t heard about that recently. And I’m, if you have to run from your own home while it’s being invaded, how the heck can you have the right to arrest somebody else for a crime?

Jim Montag
You should have that right. And you still have it for the present time. But I don’t think that’s going to last too much longer. They’ll pass some law to restrict your ability to defend yourself, to defend your life, and to stop and prevent a crime.

Bob Metz
Now, when was the last time you ever heard of anybody making a citizen’s arrest? Are you even aware of that, that was effective in any way?

Jim Montag
It’s very uncommon to do this. You have to go to a prosecutor and lay private information and bring the people up on charge. And the prosecutors don’t like it and the police don’t like it. And it’s a make work program for the police department to prevent you from being able to do this.

Bob Metz
You know, that’s interesting. I only know of one personal encounter with a, with a citizen’s arrest that was made. And it was my old friend and compatriot. You remember Marc Emery when he was in town. And he used to have a contract on the kiosks along Dundas Street that used to be there. And he would occasionally catch kids defacing the kiosks or even young adults, you know, marking them up with markers. And he’d hold somebody and call the police. And then they just kind of refused to come. And he’d find out later that day he’d get a ticket for something like, you know, making an illegal right hand turn or something like that.

They’d kind of get even with him all the time. And it almost speaks to that. Is there any point in doing anything about crime in this kind of an environment that we seem to be going into? Or what can we do to defend ourselves?

Jim Montag
Well, police response times usually are 30 minutes and they’re increasing. So if there is any violent crime or any crime being committed, the criminal is long gone before the police ever gets there. And if you cannot prevent this violent crime from being committed against yourself or against anybody else, then the criminal has the right to go ahead and do it.

And it’s just inviting him to do it again and again and again. Whereas if you had the right to defend yourself, and if you had the weapons to do it, you would certainly stop a lot of violent crime.

Bob Metz
Well, that’s how it seems to me. I know relatives of my own in the states who stopped crimes from occurring because they had a gun, either against themselves or someone else. And so to me, whether the police are overworked or whether they consider it their job or its job protection, I don’t see that really as even being a motivation. I’d still think if I was a police officer, I’d like to know that there were good citizens around that I could count on for some kind of help or resistance. But instead, they’re making the law abiding citizen become, you know, gun control almost makes them fear their protector, doesn’t it, in a way?

Like, you shouldn’t have to be afraid of the police, but you’re worried about them coming after you for sometimes the most ridiculous things. Am I going off on a tangent here?

Jim Montag
No, I think what you say is right, Bob. It’s just something that shouldn’t be happening, but it is. And the more restrictive you get on guns and weapons and things like that, the worse it’s going to get.

Bob Metz
Now, we live in a free society. And just to give you my take on what I think that means, I think ultimately in a free society, you have a right to defend yourself.

If you don’t have that right to use force to defend what is yours, I would say you don’t have any rights at all. And I would also say that a government in a free society, and that has to be the adjective here, I mean, if we’re talking about a totalitarian society, none of these rules would apply. But in a free society, I think the assumption is, at least it is on my part, that the government has no real rights or authority that a citizen himself would not have, which sort of fits back into our discussion about the citizen’s arrest. So that the just use of force in government ultimately derives from every individual’s right to self-defense. And that would mean that you have the right to defend yourself against the unjust use of force to defend your life, liberty, and property. Now, when governments take on rights that we as citizens do not have, is that the point where we’ve crossed the line? Is it already we’re not in a free society anymore? Or is it a gray area? Or?

Jim Montag
Well, as soon as they have that right, then you definitely have crossed the line. And that’s a totalitarian government. They will tell you what to do and how to do it, when to do it, and where to do it. And there’s nothing you can do about it. And that’s what happens.

Bob Metz
You know, I always picture a day at some time in the future, which I see coming in some way, shape, or form. You know, weapons are getting more and more sophisticated, smaller and smaller. And realistically, any fan of Star Trek, you’ve seen them running around with the little phaser, I can see a society someday in the future, where we have lasers and phasers and things that are very destructive, that could be in the hands of an individual. And it strikes me that you could have all the controls in the world and not really do anything about that, and that you have to live and choose to live in a rational culture to minimize, you know, those kinds of dangers, because weapons are already getting pretty fancy, aren’t they?

Jim Montag
Well, weapons always were dangerous. You know, we used to have clubs, and before that, rocks and swords and spears, and they were all dangerous because they could all kill somebody. And, you know, these problems just didn’t arise with that type of weapon unless the weapon was in the hands of a criminal. And the big thing is, when you try to control weapons, this is ludicrous, what you should try to control is the criminal, and prevent the criminal from having the gun. And that will prevent your crime. But to control weapons, it’s not going to work, and the criminal is just going to be free to commit more crimes.

Bob Metz
We’ll pick up on that point on the other side of this break when we talk about some of the stats on other weapons that are being used. We’ll be back right after this.

Clip (John Stossel – Gun control)
Many states are passing gun un-control. They’re allowing citizens to carry guns with them. It’s called concealed carry, or right to carry, and it comforts women like Laura Jones.

It’s a safety thing. I feel better knowing I have a way to protect myself.

But many people are horrified at the idea of right to carry laws.

That is frightening. Can you imagine just walking up and down the street knowing that 90% of the people you pass has a deadly weapon, and you could be their next target? I think that we’d be living in a state of terror.

But surprise, 36 states already have right to carry laws, and people in these states are not living in terror. We called state safety officials in all these states, and not one reported an upsurge in crime.

Why? Well, maybe because guns are used twice or three times as often for defensive uses as they are to commit crimes. That’s what happened at this car dealership. The owner had a gun, so when these two armed men came in to rob him, he shot it, and they ran. Studies on defensive use of guns find this kind of thing happens at least 700,000 times a year. I just reacted.

It was a life or death thing, and you just, I think you react.

Armed men broke into Susan Gonzalez’s house and shot her. She grabbed her husband’s gun and started firing.

I figured if I could shoot one of them, even if we both died, someone would know who had been in my home.

She killed one of the intruders. The other ran away.

I don’t necessarily like guns still, but I carry one because I know now what can happen and why you do need a gun.

Clip (Star Trek: A Private Little War)
Do I have to say it?

It’s not bad enough there’s already one serpent in Eden teaching one side about gunpowder. You’re going to make sure they all know about it.

Exactly. Each side receives the same knowledge and the same type of firearm.

Have you gone out of your mind? Yes, maybe you have.

If this planet is to develop in the way it should, we must equalize both sides again.

Jim, that means you’re condemning this whole planet to a war that may never end.

It could go on for year after year, massacre after massacre.

All right, doctor. All right, all right, say I’m wrong. Say I’m drugged. Say the woman who drugged me. What is your sober, sensible solution to all this?

I don’t have a solution.

Bob Metz
Welcome back to Just Right here on CHRW 94.9 FM. I’m Bob Metz and I’m here with Jim Montag in the studio. Call in if you like at 519-661-3600. We’ve only got a few minutes left in the show. And you know, I think that last clip says a lot in the sense of for all the complaints people have about guns, they don’t offer very many solutions in terms of what to actually do about the incredible rising rates of crime in certain areas. You know, it’s still statistically unlikely that the average person is going to have something happening to them in Canada. But lest you think we’re overreacting in terms of our right to self-defense being eroded. It’s not just about guns. As I note here in an article by Karen Selick published back in ‘95 in Defense of Self-Defense, where she points out that not just weapons of like a gun, as powerful as a gun, but strictly defensive weapons like mace, stun guns, and pepper spray, all devices which could be used for protection, you know, even by people who don’t want to own a gun, they’ve been declared prohibited weapons in Canada.

So it just goes to show you that it does come down to that basic right of self-defense. And when we look at another graph I have here, restricted firearms and homicide Ontario 1961 to 1990. Ontario had 4,285 homicides during that period, 67.2% of which were non-firearms of any sort. And the others were of various firearms, could have been restricted or registered, non-restricted, unknown, but they’re registered as such a narrow slip in there. I think it works out to less than one, oh sorry, it was 0.7% of total crime.

So obviously it was like that then, it’s still like that now. What is the solution if people don’t know what the solution should be to the crime rate? Should we be arming everyone? We’ve only got a few minutes left so.

Jim Montag
Well, not necessarily arming everyone, but at least giving back the right to people to defend themselves and protect their life. I have a few interesting statistics here. In Orlando, Florida in 1966, reported rapes were 35.9 per 100,000. The Orlando Police Department organized a handgun training program for women. One year later the reported rapes were 4.1 per 100,000. And they only issued a couple hundred concealed carry permits. And it just drastically reduced the rape rate with women. And there were no instances of women running around on the street shooting other people.

And then of course there’s the Kennesaw Georgia case back in 1982, which you wrote about. I know, do you have that clipping with you there about Kennesaw?

Yeah, in 1982, Kennesaw Georgia, the home state or the home of Florida or Georgia State University passed a law which made it mandatory for all homeowners to possess a firearm.

Bob Metz
So they actually made it mandatory. Yes. So this is going, now see I wouldn’t, I don’t know that I’d support that either myself, but let’s just look at what the results were.

Jim Montag
In less than a year Kennesaw’s burglary rate dropped 60%. In less than a year. Because who’s going to burgle a place if you think the person inside might have a gun or has a gun? In Kennesaw Georgia there was a gun in that home. So their burglary rate was very low and naturally.

Bob Metz
And of course the criminals would know that in a town where it was actually mandated to do that. That speaks to the issue where John Stossel, you know, interviewed those prisoners in that prison who all said the thing they fear the most is a home owner with a gun. They don’t worry about the police.

Jim Montag
Yeah. And naturally there’d be no home invasions if the criminal knew that there was a gun in the house.

Bob Metz
Now I guess we’ve only got a few seconds left. Just looking at the end of your article, do you still stick by these basic points that you think that what we should do by due process you say is to enact the following suggestion that if anybody does anything with the intention of doing harm to another person that they should, you know, be given a very specific mandatory sentence, no plea bargaining. You still think that way?

Jim Montag
Oh yes. That would be one way to prevent or to stop the illegal use of weapons. Simply if you pick up a gun or any weapon, a tire iron, anything whatsoever with the intention of doing harm to somebody, you should get about a year in jail. Secondly, if you actually do harm to that person, five years in jail. No plea bargaining, no joint sentencing or anything else.

Bob Metz
If you’re found guilty of initiating violence with a gun, isn’t there a danger of someone defending themselves and getting caught in that situation? Maybe being, I guess that’s just another issue of justice, isn’t it?

Jim Montag
Well, you have to prove that you were defending yourself. Now, if, as in all cases, if you were a senior citizen of my age or a woman, you had some 25 or 30-year-old guy that was six foot two of 200 pounds, there would not be any question that you were defending yourself.

Bob Metz
That would be pretty clear in most cases, I would hope. Well, Jim, I want to thank you for joining us today. We’ve only touched upon, I know the tip of the iceberg here. I’ve got so much information here that just might shock people in terms of just the reality of the situation. We’re, how come the media doesn’t cover this stuff as a regular thing? We’ve got about 10 seconds to go, but…

Jim Montag
The media puts in the paper what they think you want to read, and there are many, many things that are not put in the newspaper. I can think of one very recently where a hunter shot somebody when they were out turkey hunting, and it was never a follow-up story. Yeah, well, maybe not what you want to hear about. But there was sure a lot of publicity about the initial occurrence.

Bob Metz
Yeah, well, thanks a lot for joining us today, Jim. Maybe we’ll carry on from this point in the future. But for now, we’re done for this week, folks. So join us again next week when we will continue our journey in the right direction. Until then, be right, stay right, do right, act right, and think right.

Clip (Just for Laughs)
Starting today, and continuing until the end of this great event, all English-speaking Quebecers will be free to laugh in their own language. Yes. I essentially hope that no matter what happens here in Quebec, you know that you are wanted. Yes, I am sincere. When I say I don’t want you to leave. As premier of Quebec, I urge you to stay, because if you leave, there will only be left the Indians to pick on, and…well, they have guns.