A Gun Fatality

Will the Yacone slaying help focus people on reasonable efforts to restrict gun ownership by the troubled and violence-prone – and on using the tools we have?

My introduction to Bob Yacone came when, on Facebook, he viciously trashed a friend. Bob owned and ran a Deming pizza joint called “Forghedaboudit.”

The Yacones opened a “Forghedaboudit” here. Felons can’t obtain a liquor license. Bob had pled “No Contest” to child abuse (2014) and pulled a gun on someone over a parking space (2018). Thus (after getting married) the Yacones sought the license in his wife Kim’s name. At the August 2019 County Commission hearing, I unsuccessfully opposed the liquor license, even though under New Mexico law Bob might technically not be a felon. (His child abuse sentence was deferred and the road rage incident pled down to a misdemeanor,) Afterward, Kim advised me that going to their restaurant would not be healthy.

A violence-prone criminal who’d abused his family and repeatedly demonstrated why he shouldn’t have a gun, has now shot his wife dead. Does that suggest we must create better safeguards or educate people about using the ones we have? Or both? It should spark a collegial conversation by people of good will about what efforts could be made, consistent with law and with fairness to gun owners, to make such events less frequent. Can’t say we could have prevented this one; but even though DWI laws don’t prevent all drunken-driving, we try to decrease the totals.

The system should have taken Bob Yacone’s gun. Even if he’s not a felon, someone could have alerted the sheriff to the danger.

Mr. Yacone - photo from Sun-News

We have a “red-flag law” under which someone should have sought to confiscate Bob’s gun. It wasn’t used. The law’s novelty and complexity intimidates folks. New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence offers training on using the law. I hope a future column or radio show will share relevant information. Even some law enforcement folks and judges seem not to understand it fully.

Kim repeatedly filed (then withdrew) papers seeking a restraining order against Bob. Then she filed and didn’t chicken out. (When she died, a court hearing was imminent on Bob’s request for a restraining order requiring Kim to move out.) Family Court judges or commissioners granting restraining orders have a form on which a required question concerns gun ownership. They rarely ask.

Sheriff Kim Stewart is more than concerned. She repeatedly explained to one Domestic Violence Commissioner that asking the violent spouse whether s/he has guns (then taking them) is not optional. The commissioner vaguely said she’d do better. Stewart says spot checks show no record that the question is asked. The problem is statewide.

Stewart called the situation “tragic and frightening,” and added, “People say the cops don’t do anything; we do; but we’re part of a law-enforcement system.”

There’s a lot to say. But one old Sun-News article stopped me cold. It reported Nick Yacone’s triumph in a regional cross-country meet, as a Mayfield senior. In the photo of his young face, his eyes are closed with exhausted exultation over hard-earned victory. It’s a pure and beautiful moment. But those same eyes discovered his mother’s dead body, believing his father murdered her. Nick’s first two decades have been tough.

So above I hope we do better by Nick from now on, and even for Bob. We should imprison Bob, but recall that something in Bob’s life bent him too.

                                             - 30 -

 

[The above column appeared Sunday, 25 September 2022, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and on KTAL (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and be available on both station’s websites.]

[I believe Mr. Yaccone was charged with both 1^st degree homicide (murder) and being a felon in possession of a firearm. (The latter charge may not stand, under New Mexico law, because one of his felonies resulted in a deferred sentence and the other was pled down to a misdemeanor; but we’ll see. IF that’s the effect of deferring sentence, perhaps the law on that should be changed!) Reportedly he confessed the murder to his daughter, so the fact that he shot her may not be disputed; but whether or not whatever led up to the shooting justifies a lesser charge may be an issue at trial.]

[The important lesson, if there is one, is that it’d be worthwhile to educate citizens (and perhaps courts) regarding the tools we have for trying to minimize these kinds of occurrences. Notably, the red-flag law is not used as frequently as perhaps it should be. It’s new; and one expert suggested to me that some folks are confused because where the law lists parties who may initiate the complaint, and uses the phrase “including,” it does not specify “included but not limited to,” as lawyers always do in contracts and most other legal documents. That means that if Mrs. X complains that she’s scared stiff that her husband may shoot her, then resists filing a red-flag request because that might set Mr. X off, a law-enforcement agent can file the request. A lawyer would know that “the word ‘dogs’ includes German shepherds, collies, and Pomeranians” does NOT mean Poodles or Chihuahuas (or mongrels) are not considered dogs. That would require: “The word ‘dog’ means Shepherds, collies, and Pomeranians.” While lawyers usually insert “but not limited to,” after “includes,” to make it very clear, it’s not essential. But, unfortunately, some law enforcement personnel read the list after “including” to exclude folks not listed.  

New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence has resources and information to help, including an expert who teaches law enforcement and citizens about use of New Mexico’s Red-Flag Law. Whatever your views on gun ownership or regulations, contact them (through the website or by calling (505) 984 – 3058, particularly if you are living in fear of someone with a gun, know someone who is, or work in a position where you’re helping people who may be in fear.

Secondly, I’m curious about the suggestion that courts and commissioners considering applications for restraining orders rarely ask the required question about gun-possession. One source suggests that it’s because the question is near the end, and may come after a long, acrimonious hearing, in which other issues such as child custody seem more urgent, and everyone is tired and on-edge. ]

[At any rate, it’s tragic. I wish the Yacone family the best.]

 

– 30 –

As Ukraine Fights for its Democracy, Let's Struggle to Save What's Left of Ours!

If I were a Pakistani villager or a Central American refugee I might hate us.

Pakistan is inundated by floods that have unhoused more than 33 million people and may not fully recede for three to six months. Experts say climate weirdness was a factor in Pakistan’s worst flooding ever.

Arkansas, Mississippi, Kansas, New Mexico, Nebraska, West Virginia, Idaho, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Montana, Rhode Island, Delaware, both Dakotas, Alaska, Vermont, Wyoming, and a third of Iowa = 33,000,000 human beings. But, hell, it’s just Pakistanis.

The U.S. is a major contributor to global weirdness: we drive around in automobiles, even when we don’t need to, and complain about the least inconvenience; our gas and oil companies make obscene profits; and we elect congressfolk, and even presidents, who play to the economically powerful by denying that our conduct could affect something as big as Earth’s climate. Scientists think otherwise. Events are teaching us those scientists are onto something.

Pakistan is a large carbon emitter, with 2.51 tons of greenhouse gasses per person. We contribute 19.27, about double China’s 9.71 tons per person. (2018 figures) Russia’s at 16.07.

Central America has long been a target experienced the U.S.’s “Whack-a-Mole” effort to stamp out other nations’ democracies we find inconvenient. One reason some countries are dysfunctional is that we’ve caused or winked at military or rightist coups against democratically-elected leaders in what one U.S. President called “shithole countries.” Free trade agreements, such as NAFTA, have helped multinational corporations at the expense of farmers and small businesspeople. Our sanctions have helped make Venezuela unlivable, yet we’re shocked that by a surge in Venezuelan immigrants. (Fortunately, migrants seek opportunity here, not revenge.) We can and should protect our borders without denying our role in people’s need to migrate.

What we’ve done to Cuba, Venezuela, and other countries that don’t kowtow to us undermines our righteous anger at Putin’s Ukrainian invasion. Russia argues that the USSR contained Ukraine and expresses concern about NATO’s extension into countries bordering Russia. If we thought independent and Soviet-friendly Cuba so dangerous we tried to attack it (before any Soviet missile-launchers arrived on the island), why shouldn’t Russia feel that way about countries it shares borders with? (Let’s not forget, in my youth the U.S. waged a lengthy, unjustifiable war in Viet Nam that most other countries saw was as wrong and foolish as Putin’s present war.)

But I’m glad for Ukraine’s recent war successes, particularly accounts of Ukrainian hackers posing as young women and getting Russian soldiers to send them photographs from the front, then passing those to the Ukrainian Army to wipe out the Russian base where they were taken.

I like democracy, and Ukraine has one. As Putin kills or jails political enemies, closes newspapers and TV stations, punishes and stifles every form of personal freedom, I watch Ukrainian resistance and remember why I’m shouting so loudly against the threats to democratic aspects of our own country. We don’t quite have a democracy; but our republic’s Constitution was written to protect us from tyranny. As the Trumpists weaken our democratic tradition, I contemplate how valuable it is, even though we’ve allowed many international crimes to be committed in our names.

I’m not optimistic about the U.S., given the dangerously wacky supreme court and several states suppressing democracy, endangering women’s health, and even attacking companies for acknowledging global warming. But we weren’t real optimistic about Ukraine, either.

                                     – 30 --

 

[The above column appeared Sunday, 18 September 2022, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and on KTAL (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and be available on both station’s websites.]

Couy Griffin / Donald Trump and Insurrection / Illegal Retention of Classified Documents

Insurrection: “an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.”

What happened in January, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol appears to qualify. Judges have concluded it does. New Mexico District Judge Francis Mathew held that under the 14^th Amendment Otero County Commissioner Couy Griffin couldn’t hold public office because he’d participated in that insurrection. (Judge Mathew noted the irony of Griffin’s argument that Mathew should “respect the will of the people” of Otero County when Griffin admitted trying to overturn “the will of the people” of the United States.)

The Donald Trump who inspired, abetted, and tried to join that insurrection seems to be the same Donald Trump whose criminal conduct regarding top-secret classified documents has endangered U.S. interests. Since documents showing what the U.S. knows about other countries could tell those countries where Washington got that information, he may have endangered lives; or the U.S., uncertain where things stand, might pull someone out of danger, foregoing further useful information.

Trump’s response has not been reassuring. Of course he attacked and lied, his default responses to anything negative. (His followers physically attacked the FBI.) He said the documents were mostly keepsakes and mementos that belonged to him. He falsely claimed to have declassified the documents; then he claimed he’d given them all back, and one of his attorneys signed a sworn statement to that effect; then, after the search, Trump claimed it was unnecessary, because everything was rosy and cooperative between him and the government.

The documents (NOT mementos!) are top-secret for a reason. Some concern other nations’ nuclear capacities. They are, however, valuable, especially to a man with a long history of monetizing anything he can, and maximizing his income, no matter whom or what he destroys.

The sole rational motive for keeping those documents is to make money. Lots of money. As a former FBI head has recently said, any country “would give its right arm” to know what the U.S. knows about its nuclear situation. Would a former president take their money for that? Even one who has a long history of putting his own interest in front of the nation’s, as in holding up Ukraine aid to browbeat Zelensky into a bogus investigation of Hunter Biden? (Like Putin, Trump figured an ex-comic would fold when threatened.)

We should want to get to the bottom of this, whatever the truth is.

Trump-appointed Federal District Judge Aileen Cannon has provided Trump a potential delay by granting his request to appoint a special master to review material seized from Mar-a-Lago. Experts deplore the ruling. Even Trump’s former Attorney-General, William Barr, says Cannon’s ruling is “deeply flawed in a number of ways” and should be appealed.

Attorney-General Merrick Garland’s measured pace provides a healthy contrast to the Justice Department under Trump. Trump kept pushing the Justice Department to bend the law to prosecute folks he didn’t like, such as former Senator John Kerry. Garland heard a lot of criticism for not acting quickly on information from the Select Committee and other sources that pointed to probable Trump crimes. When Trump’s home was eventually searched, no one even gave Joe Biden advance notice. Garland must want to go after Trump, but he’s weighing that against the damage prosecuting a former president would do to Justice Department credibility, and has repeatedly delayed.

Meanwhile, Trump urges us to give him a further opportunity.

                                                       – 30 –

 

[The above column appeared Sunday, 11 September 2022, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website on the newspaper’s website and KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and on KTAL (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and be available on both station’s websites.]

[Judge Mathew is a Democrat who was nominated by Republican Governor Susana Martinez in 2013. He serves in the First Judicial District in Santa Fe.]

[Federal District Judge Aileen Cannon granted Mr. Trump’s request to appoint a special master to review material seized from Mar-a-Lago, and thus delay any possible charges against Mr. Trump.

Most experts find the ruling foolish and unwarranted. Even former Trump toady William Barr, Trump’s attorney-general, says it’s “deeply flawed in a number of ways” and should be appealed – and that Cannon failed even to address the key issue of whether a former president may invoke \executive privilege to keep the executive branch from reviewing documents.

Response on-line to this column has been interesting. One fellow somehow construed wanting to enforce the laws on state secrets as a “Marxist position.” One on-line comment asked: “mr goodman, compare your ‘insurrection’ to portland, seatle, and kenosha burning while the lefty-looney media and democrats cheered the rioters on-- ” Sure:

> portland, seattle, and kenosha were (a) misconduct by citizens which should not have occurred, but did not attack our democracy;

> although those were wildly exaggerated by Fox News (during one report about Portland, suggesting blacks were killing whites, I was on the phone with my [white] sun who was on the scene, standing beside a woman who got her face shot up by a rubber bullet, at a time when not much seemed to be happening), they were not sanctioned and encouraged by officials such as Mr. Trump, Senator Hawley, etc. I think you’ll find that while officials negotiated with them and chose that course over major violence, officials did not encourage them;

> let me know which “left-loony media” were egging those folks on. None that I saw. I think some Democrats may well have said the impulse toward violent destruction of property was understandable, I don’t recall any Democratic politic leaders (and certainly no one anywhere near the party’s “main stream”) actually encouraging such conduct.]

[Michael Hays quite reasonably commented that I went to far in saying money was the only reasonable motive for Trump's retention of the documents, and that holding them as a possible "Get Out of Jail Free" card might qualify too.]

Partial Student-Loan Forgiveness

It’s been interesting to watch the popular reaction to Joe Biden’s belated move on federal student loan forgiveness. Student loan borrowers with annual incomes under $125,000 will be eligible for forgiveness of $10-20,000.

Lots of Facebook memes about how someone busted butt to pay her loan off. Baby Boomers shouting “unfair!” – and a few kids or grandkids shrugging back, “Well, you always told me ‘Life is Unfair.’ So, like you told me, ‘Get used to it!’”

Of course Christians don’t join in the angry protests. Early on, they read Matthew 20:1-16. They understand Jesus’s point that if I contracted to weed a vineyard for eight hours for six shekels, and at closing time the landowner paid me six shekels, and paid six to some guy who came to work after lunch, it shouldn’t get my nose out of joint. (Some may figure Matthew was a Communist because Mark omitted that parable.) To me, Jesus might be saying, “Listen, if my Father forgives some sinner who turned to Him late in life, lifelong good folks should welcome him to the fold, not grumble.” Elsewhere Jesus points out, in a line we desert-dwellers can appreciate, that God sends rain both on the just and on the unjust.

Irritation is understandable, among both the vineyard laborers and folks who worked diligently to pay off their school loans, as well as among those who pay taxes they now figure will go to compensate the government for forgiven school loans.

Oddly, the same folks are far less irritated by huge corporate bailouts and tax breaks for the wealthy, and are annoyed Biden wants to arm the IRS to collect more of what corporations and the wealthy owe us. Some of the folks cursing Biden for helping education debtors may idolize Donald Trump, whose many failures to pay his debts have cost investors and tradespeople dearly. Go figure!

In my college days, tuition wasn’t such a huge burden. Tuition’s higher now; and colleges have moved from scholarships to student loans, which hang around students’ necks. Some debtors were bilked by fly-by-night “schools” like Trump University, with false promises, then left owing money for credits no real school would honor. Others are mired in crazy deals in which they’ve paid monthly, but actually owe more than the initial loan!

Parents and a small scholarship helped me through college. As an NMSU grad student, I worked as a graduate assistant, teaching, and also as a freelance filmmaker. Later, law school generated such a mountain of debt that instead of returning to Las Cruces, I started at a top San Francisco law firm, at a high salary. Inflation during the early ‘80’s made my debts seem smaller. I lived frugally. Within five years, I’d paid it all off. (Talk about a fortunate laborer!)

Widespread education benefits all of us. Maybe that’s why, in many countries, it’s free. Educated people are more productive, more able to read and listen critically to political, economic, and other important material, and more likely to instill in their kids a love for books and learning, and even creativity.

As with health care, our wonderfully wealthy country is way behind, largely because we still let big corporations, banks, and the obscenely wealthy take more than their fair share of what our country produces.

Let’s support these folks, whose educations contribute to our society, and spare the next generation of college students such a heavy burden.

                                                             – 30 – 

 

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 4 September 2022, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and on KTAL (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and be available on both station’s websites.]

[I do think it’s quite fair to wonder about Joe Biden’s motives. He has always opposed educational debt forgiveness, and even now has enacted a very partial form of it. Seems obvious he’d placating the significant numbers in his party who favor debt forgiveness. Compromising, as folks do in governments. Is he also making a larger political calculation, that the move will appeal to more voters than it appalls? “Buying votes with our money,” a critic might put it? I suppose he’s at least convinced it won’t hurt him; but unlike abortion and other issues where a clear public majority opposes a ban, even in Kansas, I’d not bet a whole lot of my limited funds on the proposition that “partial student-loan forgiveness” would win in a national referendum.]