Across the Great Divide

Suicide Reveals Challenges of Managing Guns and Mental Health.

This post first appeared as "Mental illness, easy gun access can be a toxic combination" in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel.

I still remember that windy, solitary run west of town early one April morning in 1984.

Folded newspapers waited to be collected from driveways. Depending on how they landed, my father’s face looked back at me, mile after mile.

It’s with me still.

As the local economy sank and businesses failed, 1984 was hard for everyone, but an especially lousy time to be a banker like my father, who had risen from poor circumstances to prominence.

Unlike those of a Wall Street stripe, he knew his clients by name and bore a great deal of empathy for their financial hardships. At the same time, he was under pressure to ensure that the bank remained sound.

I can only speculate about the cause of what happened next — whether hidden fault lines in his makeup collapsed under the pressure — but something in him broke.

He was a leader in the bank and the community, and he was supposed to be strong. He sought help, but he was also reluctant to let his illness be known. His sense of failed responsibility to other people only compounded his distress.

Far away in Minnesota, I was told there was nothing I could do here to help, that he was not himself and I should wait to visit until he was better. We all thought he was going to get better.

And then we got the call to come home.

One morning my father awoke, started his morning routine, waited for my mother to get into the shower, and then he went downstairs to the family room with a gun.

We’ll never know if he’d planned his death all along or if it was an impulse. A reaction to his medications. A final loss of hope. Or, the most chilling thought of all, that he feared harming someone in his family when reality and nightmares crossed over into each other.

Almost 30 years later, we’ve each made our separate peace with not knowing.

In 2012, Mesa County surpassed a grim record for suicides: We’re among the top counties in one of the top states. There are a lot of possible explanations for why the Mountain West has the highest rates of suicide — broad gun ownership, communities without good access to mental health services, a rural landscape and individualistic culture that stresses self-reliance and increases isolation. There’s even a theory about high altitude’s effect on the brains of people with depression.

I only know this for sure: Each suicide is its own sad story, leaving a mysterious incompleteness, a private pain. Each death creates a slipstream of questions about what cues survivors missed and what we might have done differently.

The answers can’t save a lost loved one, colleague or friend, but they can help illuminate the dual denial that makes guns and mental illness such a lethal combination.

Lately, the nation has been obsessed with the Sandy Hook Elementary school killings. Opinions are split on whether the tragedy points out the need for more gun control, better mental health access, a national registry of persons with mental illness or even more guns in the hands of citizens.

All seem to agree the public needs protection from mass killers like Adam Lanza.

But is that the real problem? It’s possible that Lanza’s murderous behavior was the byproduct of a suicidal decision and not the other way around.

School shootings like Sandy Hook are sensational but extremely rare, amounting to around three-dozen deaths per year.

There were 8,583 murders with firearms in 2011. Less than one percent of all homicides, or fewer than 120, involved more than two victims.

Contrast those numbers with the 19,766 Americans who reportedly took their own lives using firearms in 2011 — more than half the total suicide toll of 36,909.

I share these reflections because I want our community to take seriously the threat that firearms pose for people who are in mental distress.

It’s important to know that simply treating a mental condition may not be enough to save a loved one. Denial is natural. Mental states change. Easy access to a gun can make a temporary swing permanent.

At the same time, no current gun-sale law, licensing scheme or mental health screening would have prevented my father from having the gun that killed him. That heavy burden falls largely upon family, health care providers and friends who are hoping for the best, not thinking the unthinkable.

Some might say my father would’ve killed himself another way if there weren’t a gun in the house. Perhaps, but no one knows. Another method would have been more complicated, less lethal and less subject to a transitory despair.

My appeal is simply this. We should be wary of passing laws that afford an illusion of protection but fail to address the realities of isolation, irrational thought and the ready availability of the most lethal means of suicide.

Righteous Hiker Meets Trespassing Four-Wheeler.

Less than a mile from our house sit a few hundred acres of empty private land. It's unfenced and unposted and apparently—except for its future value as desert home sites—unloved by the people who own it.

But others do. It attracts dog walkers by day, underage partiers by night, and according to the season,  occasional cross-country skiers, mountain bikers and four-wheelers who find this a convenient playground, though far inferior to public lands farther from town.

In fact, we have better trails out our back door, but lately our dog has wanted to walk in this direction and, permissive father that I am, I let her pick the route.

Today, Roxy spotted a man in blaze orange walking his Shiba Inu across the road from the paved trail where we were walking, so I let her cross and we made our way along the maze of double track the four-wheelers have made through the snow. I know from biking here the ground shifts from a soft red sand to a sticky gumbo—each nearly impassible in their own way and therefore irresistible to a guy with a 4X4.

It's not my property and thus none of my business who else is using the land, but it does grate me when I come upon a hidden bowl where four-wheelers have been spinning circles and unsuccessfully trying to climb one of the hills. Elsewhere their driving has simply packed the snow, but here they've churned up the ground enough that the crust had melted and my boot slipped into a generous patch of the gumbo. (Think rubberized wet concrete that will adhere the rest of the walk, even as I scuff through snowbanks and stomp on rocks.)

When someone's sport tears up the earth this way, it doesn't seem like a game to me. I entertained a scenario in which I'd come upon some of them, pretend to be the property owner and run them off.

As Roxy and I circled back toward home, I spied one of those trucks coming up the road toward us. And then I saw the two big Labradors running along behind.

I confess uncharitable thoughts in that moment. A trespassing four-wheeler too lazy-ass to walk his dogs. We stepped off road which cut through a hillock and waited for him to pass. Meanwhile, the yellow Lab of the pair passed the truck and ran toward us.

"Tahoe... Tahoe, get back here," the driver yelled.

Though Tahoe was twice Roxy's size he didn't look like trouble, and Roxy is usually fine with other dogs, but she was leashed and you always have to watch how dogs react in that situation. They sniffed each other and then Tahoe headed back to the truck, which had stopped partway up the incline. The driver was out and loading the other dog into the covered back.

Roxy and I moved closer and to the other side of the road so he could see us better when he resumed.

That's when I saw the wheelchair symbol on his license plate.

He worked his way slowly back to the cab, leaning on the side of the truck for support and shuffling his feet a few inches at a time. When he reached the door, he had to use it to lift himself up to the seat, but because of the truck's angle, the door kept trying to swing closed on his fingers.

I said, "Your dog was fine," and he just nodded. He had a long greying ponytail (Western Colorado must be the men's ponytail capital of the world) and looked to me like a motorcyclist who'd come back from a bad accident, but not all the way. He had one leg up on the floor and rocked a bit as he lifted his left leg with his hands against the closing door and the skew of gravity.

Not the sort of man you ask if he wants help.

I waved as he drove past. He kept both hands on the wheel and drove out of there, and I realized I felt like the guilty one for cutting his outing short.

How Emmer's Jobs Agenda Matches MN Forward's.

If Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel wants to give personal campaign donations to the likes of GOP candidate for Governor Tom Emmer and Tea Party Candidate for Bombthrower Michele Bachmann, that's his right. If Target and other Minnesota corporations want to give money out of the corporate coffers to benefit such candidates, that's also now their right.

But as a shareholder, I'm interested in hearing how the supported front groups like MN Forward will advance Target's (and other Minnesota corporation) business interests. Steinhafel's response has focused so far on Emmer's social policy views, which he implies are at odds with Target's values.

As you know, Target has a history of supporting organizations and candidates, on both sides of the aisle, who seek to advance policies aligned with our business objectives, such as job creation and economic growth.

Steinhafel says "We rarely endorse all advocated positions of the organizations or candidates we support," which is fair, but he also disclaims a political or social agenda — leaving open the question of what the agenda is that gets $150,000 in corporate cash and in-kind contributions.

Since the CEO is silent on that, I checked MN Forward to see what it says about its agenda. Basically, its entire website is a donation page, without any detail about specific policies it stands for:

MN Forward is a new organization established to ensure that private-sector job creation and economic growth are at the top of the agenda during the 2010 campaign. We are working with a broad coalition of Minnesota job creators to elect candidates from both parties who support policies that enhance job growth in Minnesota.

Okay, no there there.

Let's look at the jobs agenda of Tom Emmer, the candidate so far benefiting from MN Forward's advocacy. He waxes about the good old days when Honeywell and other large companies were the state's big employers. Back in 2008, when Marty Seifert was shopping this story around, I explained why this was not such a scary development. It's still the case.

And Emmer trots out this claim, also debunked in 2008 and updated last month.

Today, an expansive and expensive state government has crippled our business environments and lost our greatest resource – our people. The state’s largest employers are now the State of Minnesota, our public university systems, and the federal government.

Higher taxes and more government spending do not lead to a better economic climate. Proposals to raise taxes and fees or eliminate tax incentives for businesses are not restoring our competitive advantage for business development. A reputation as the highest taxed state in the nation will not encourage economic growth but only drive it away.

Our state’s future relies on a blueprint for economic development built on private initiative and the entrepreneurial spirit. Strengthening our economy through business retention, relocation, and development in the private sector must be our priority. We must help create jobs by supporting tax incentives, streamlining permitting, and reducing mandates.

State government has "lost our people" and "proposals" have not fixed a bad national economy. The blueprint for creating jobs involves tax incentives for business and relaxing oversight and mandates (such as minimum wage regulations?).

Hardly the kind of business case that would earn internal funding from a Target CEO, so maybe there's more meat somewhere. [UPDATE: A Bluestem Prairie has some. ] Instead, all we have to go by are Emmer's more clearly articulated positions.

But that's asking for a lot from a candidate who misses the fact that the same Minnesota business climate he decries supported the phenomenal growth of his two biggest back-door funders — Target and Best Buy.

All Candidates are on Equal Footing in MInnesota.

Dick Cheney did it. George W. Bush did it. Hillary Clinton did it.

But Tom Emmer, Tom Horner and Matt Entenza will not.

To be fair, federal law requires disclosure of tax returns by candidates. Minnesota law does not, so the refuseniks are within their rights.

People who believe in transparency in government have a case that financial disclosure, including a spouse's income, provides insight into what influences may come into play if that candidate is elected.

Those who believe financial privacy should prevail are in the minority, it appears. Many other states mandate disclosure of a spouse's income and financial assets.

All I have to add here is that candidate financial disclosure is one place in Minnesota where gay and lesbian couples have the same rights as married couples!

Warming Up for the Apocalypse.

Can't say I'm making a comeback, since I still have a book to write. Novelist and blogger don't mix, but:

1. Slept out on the porch the other night, but did not bring in my stuff. Today the wind from No Thoroughfare Canyon, over a three foot wall,  has: a) Blown two interlocking rubber pads into the desert, one found, one not; b) Dropped a 4-inch-thick Cornelius Vanderbilt bio to the floor and sent its dust jacket to parts unknown; c) Folded up the three-part foam sleeper cushion and even closed the velcro clasp. Screw the melting ice cap — climate change is making my sleep outs untenable!
2. Rand Paul and Libertarians are a distraction, and this helps me ignore them: "never, and I mean never, has there been capitalist enterprise that wasn't ultimately underwritten by the state."
3. I'm wrapping up my volunteer gig with the homeless in Colorado as I head back to Minnesota. A few weeks ago, some local cops trashed a homeless encampment. One letter writer said, who cares? I said, some of us do. I believe the chief of police is going to do the right thing.
4. I continue to dip my toe in the voter ID discussion. Dann Dobson has a pretty good summary of why the move to require government IDs in order to vote is a subtle form of vote suppression.

Now We Can Take Guns in National Parks, too.

However, you may have to holster your dog.

Good Discussion of Voter ID Subterfuge.

The St. Paul Issues Forum has a lively discussion going about the Minnesota Voters Alliance and Citizens for Responsible Taxation's efforts to push a photo ID requirement when voting in Saint Paul, as well as Minneapolis and Duluth, three DFL stronghold cities.

MIndy's Andy Birkey has reported that the backers of the petition drives in Minneapolis don't even live in the community where they want to change the law.

The lobbying group's site quotes former Minnesota Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer: "Photo ID requirement increases voter confidence in our elections."

Actually, voter confidence in our elections has been primarily harmed by the propaganda efforts of groups like hers and the national ACORN hysteria about supposed voter fraud. 

Like a few commenters on the St. Paul Issues Forum, the MVACRT site tries to debunk claims that voter ID suppresses turnout: "In Indiana's first election after implementation of Photo ID, turnout increased 13%. In the 2008 Indiana election, turnout increased 2%, affirming the Supreme Court's feelings [sic]."

This garbles the actual study that is the basis for the comment. The study compared the first post-Photo ID election  (2006) to the previous midterm (2002) and found a 2% increase, not 13%. Voter turnout for the 2008 presidential election was substantially higher than in 2006 (2.8 million vs. 1.7 million).

The Brookings Institution cites research following Indiana's  2008 general election finding "that the state’s voter identification laws prevented a majority of votes cast by provisional ballots as a result of a lack of photo identification from being counted."

Last fall, an Indiana state appellate court struck down the ID requirement as violating the Indiana Constitution for failing to treat all voters equally.

Last year the forum's Instant Runoff Voting thread got esoteric and lost me after a while, but so far the discussion on Photo IDs is pretty good.

Rep. Tom Emmer, a GOP candidate for governor, has been been one of the advocates for tighter voter ID requirements, so I don't expect this issue to go away soon.

Lawyers, Guns and Census.

A local GOP candidate for the Colorado House got pulled over Saturday night and cited for being in possession of a handgun and under the influence of alcohol. However, the officer did not ticket David Cox for driving under the influence. (Cox declined to take a portable breath alcohol test after the officer noted some "clues" in his actions in the roadside test.)

Either the statutes governing driving under the influence and for carrying a firearm under the influence are not clear enough, or the cop felt he couldn't make the right call and split the difference.

The guy who slipped between the two laws doesn't think it's a big deal, and he didn't plan to hire a lawyer because he didn't think prosecutors could make it stick. (He was right; charges were dropped today.)

“I thought the whole thing was kind of humorous,” [Cox] said.

Cox has been issued summons or arrested four times dating back to 1999, all alcohol-related. He seems to think he's exonerated because he was stopped hours after he last consumed alcohol; no matter he was driving before and had the loaded gun in his vehicle then, too.

Quite a charmer.

*****

Another article says Grand Junction (64%) and Mesa County (63%) have higher than average (national is 60%) response rates to the U.S. Census. Aspen is only at 30%.

Why is Aspen so low? Likely, the very high proportion of second (and fourth and fifth) homes and low incidence of affordable housing in the community.

Hardly anybody actually lives in a place like that.

*****

I did locate the homeless vet who was burned out of his camp last week. I should've known how he would spend Easter weekend with no money and no desire to go to shelter.

He was in detox. Now he's got a tent and some clothes, at least.

The Angel in Sen. Clark.

According to the Associated Press, State Sen. Tarryl Clark of St. Cloud is sponsoring a bill that

could prohibit spending public dollars at in-state hotels or meeting facilities that provide their customers with pornographic materials that link sex with violence. Nonviolent adult movies would be OK.

Reader Hal Davis sees a similarity between this bill and a Minneapolis anti-pornography civil rights ordinance drafted in 1983, passed by the city council and twice vetoed by the mayor. A similar ordinance was later found unconstitutional.

Clark is aiming for Rep. Michele Bachmann's seat this fall. If she hopes to differentiate herself from Bachmann, this isn't the way to do it.

Government employees traveling on public business get discounted hotel rates. If hotels have to pick between them and other travelers, it's likely they'll go with tourists and business travelers paying  more.

This measure is a pretty ineffective stick for beating on pornography, however you look at it. If Clark doesn't want state money spent on porno movies, restrict hotel expenses to the published government rates and lower  per diems so travelers have to choose between food and a night at the movies. And if she is truly serious about eradicating violent films, good luck.

Worse, this is a poor time for political-posturing legislation that would require new enforcement efforts without saving the state any money.

I say this as someone who likes Clark, who hates to hand MDE one of those "liberal blogger" freebies, and who has managed to stay out of strip clubs and porn shops for 61 years without government encouragement.

Disclaimer: When I was an arts reviewer, with another arts reporter, I did see part of "The Devil in Miss Jones" when it first came out, under the misguided assumption it might represent some sort of advance in film making. We quickly discovered we were wrong and walked out.

I hope Sen. Clark gains a similar moment of clarity.

Drowning the Truth in the Bathtub.

Heading in from burning back some weeds, I heard the cry of a rabbit in distress. Where I live in Colorado, I can be sure it's not the Quiver Rabbit I'm hearing across the arroyo.

Coyotes lope across our land all the time. Two days ago three does trotted single file along a ridge about 60 yards from the house, as I turned to watch them, I saw a single coyote in pursuit, followed by a straggling pup. The survival parade dipped down into the wash, then back up the other side of a trail that connects to one of our regular mountain bike and hiking trails. A minute later, the deer had switched back my way and were headed around my sister's house, the coyote still about 20 yards back, the pup nowhere to be seen.

I don't have to stand in my snowless yard to know I'm in a different place. I can read the local newspaper.

Gary Harmon is the local Katherine Kersten, with a couple exceptions. He's a lot more likely to write about the Second Amendment, and his column takes more stabs at humor, though it's hard to say which columnist is funnier.

One other difference. In his day job, Harmon works as a reporter for the same newspaper, writing on a range of topics, including energy and land use.

Last week's column connecting the Tea Party movement to Dalton Trumbo was classic Harmon.

Trumbo is Grand Junction's most famous native son, which tells you quite a bit about sons from here. He gained his greatest fame as an ex-communist screenwriter who, hauled before the House Un-American Activities Committee, refused to answer questions or rat out other people in Hollywood, citing First Amendment rights. He was held in contempt of Congress, sentenced to 10 months in prison and then was exiled from regular film work for 13 years as one of the blacklisted Hollywood 10.

He was also the first writer to come back out.

Under the pen name “Robert Rich,” he won the Oscar for Best Screenplay for “The Brave One” in 1956, and finally was credited under his own name for "Spartacus," thanks to the advocacy of Kirk Douglas and Otto Preminger, who hired Trumbo for "Exodus."

The Tea Party is doing a promotion riffing on the famous "I am Spartacus" scene, giving Harmon his opening for lefty bashing.

Harmon, who has been around for a long time, summarizes Trumbo's career this way:

The real screenwriter is something of a hero to everything the tea party types stand athwart. He was a black-listed screenwriter who had been a communist and turned on his friends when the FBI came a knocking.

Get that? Trumbo goes up against Congress, defies government suppression of First Amendment rights and risks his treasure to stand on principle — which doesn't sound all that athwart what tea party types think they are doing — and Harmon turns him into a commie snitch.

Trumbo found the Communist Party about as effective and interesting as the Knights of Pythias and he moved on. It never bothered me this writer was once a communist, but it's disturbing that this columnist is still a reporter.