On May 25, African American George Floyd died when Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin, who is white, was taking Floyd into custody and pressed his knee against Floyd’s neck for upwards of 9 minutes. Former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin is currently on trial for the murder of African American George Floyd. At issue was Chauvin’s use of deadly force used to subdue George Floyd to arrest him on charges of passing a counterfeit $20 bill to purchase a pack of cigarettes.

More than a few bystander’s cell phone video caught the incident while Floyd struggled as he said at least 14 times “I can’t breathe, I can’t breathe” and crying out for his mother, until he succumbed to death. The police body cam video presented in court of George Floyd being pulled from the police vehicle by 3 officers and Chauvin placing his knee on Floyd’s neck was as compelling and disturbing as it gets.

Floyd’s death sparked violent protests in the city Minneapolis and beyond. The death led to the Black Lives movement demanding police reforms and the “defund the police” movement. The Floyd family filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in July of last year against the city, Derek Chauvin and the 3 other fired police officers charged in his death. The federal lawsuit alleged in part that the Minneapolis Police violated Floyd’s rights when they restrained him and that the city allowed a culture of excessive force and racism to flourish in its police force. On Friday, March 12, the city of Minneapolis agreed to pay $27 million to settle the civil lawsuit filed by the George Floyd family over his death in police custody.

JOURNAL GUEST COLUMN REVISTED

On Sunday, March 28, a guest opinion column written by a retired APD Area Commander was published by the Albuquerque Journal. The opinion column initially takes issue with the appointment by Mayor Keller of APD Chief Harold Medina and called it a “charade”.

The link to the full Albuquerque Journal guest column is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2374261/dual-leadership-has-never-worked-for-officers-or-residents.html?fbclid=IwAR1PhW_VsEQA6GRxLLyssKTojuDrdms5XPqgNeK37V4HpSXONeD_U_U3h7Q

The opinions expressed by the former APD Area Commander regarding the Federal Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) were extremely revealing regarding the use of force and deadly force to make an arrest and for that reason merit review. The first paragraph is deleted and deals with appointment of current APD Chief. The third paragraph is deleted and it relates to the Chief selection process. The remaining paragraphs are as follows:

“… [DELETED FIRST PARAGRAPH]…

“Crime is up and directly related to the settlement agreement, an absurd use-of-force policy and the required investigations. These decrees can last for a decade or more. Seattle and Portland have been under one since 2012, Detroit since 2003. Crime escalates wherever they are implemented. The monitor has every financial reason to prolong this decree while he drains our coffers.

… [DELETED THIRD PARAGRAPH]…

I believe I can speak for an overwhelming number of retired/former officers when I say this entire mess, settlement agreement/dual leadership is an unmitigated disaster that was preventable. We arrived here by the political inactions and lack of courage by our mayors and councils. They should have been the oversight when the chain of command faltered.

A once proud, nationally recognized, effective APD is in total shambles, and life for the officers and crime is only going to get worse. But alas, the new dual leadership at APD will “right” the sinking ship.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

There are two major false claims in the Journal guest column that need to be addressed. Those claims are:

FIRST FALSE CLAIM:

“Crime is up and directly related to the settlement agreement, an absurd use-of-force policy and the required investigations’

This is a false claim and reflects a level of ignorance of just how consent decrees work.

An academic report found an uptick in crime among the 31 cities that came under federal oversight between 1994 and 2016. The study also found those increases were temporary and diminished into statistical insignificance over time. Stephen Rushin, the study’s co-author and a professor at the Loyola University Chicago School of Law had this to say:

“To say that … [consent decrees] don’t work, at minimum is misleading. … I don’t think anyone, even folks who have spent their life doing this, would think it’s perfect. But I think to say that it just doesn’t work and everyone knows it, that’s not true. … It would be fair to say there’s some empirical support for the claim that consent decree cities have seen maybe an uptick in crime relative to unaffected cities. … But, again it’s more complicated because our research … found that after a few years, that relationship goes away.”

According to Professor Rushin, other experts said that crime rates aren’t the only factor to consider when weighing the potential costs and benefits of consent decrees. For instance, a widely cited study from the University of Texas-Dallas found that cities operating under such agreements saw a decrease in civil rights lawsuits against police.

The link to the University of Texas-Dallas study is here:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-9133.12295

Professor Rushin went on to say:

“These [crime] numbers are not destiny and there are good examples of cities as big as Chicago going through these kinds of very disruptive processes and coming out the end a much safer and seemingly more constitutional police department”.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2757809

One example is Los Angeles, which operated under a consent decree between 2000 and 2013. A 2009 report from the Harvard Kennedy School found that crime did rise in the first couple years of the consent decree, but at a pace no faster than it did across all of California.

http://lapd-assets.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/Harvard-LAPD%20Study.pdf

SECOND FALSE CLAIM :

“… [P]olitically correct politicians shoved us [meaning APD] under the settlement agreement bus” is precisely the false narrative that is the biggest reason that implementation of the reforms by APD are failing.”

The former APD Commander retired years before the Department of Justice (DOJ) Court Approved Settlement Agreement was negotiated. He was part of APD management before the DOJ came to Albuquerque.

In his letter, the retired commander makes the startling admission that sounds like it comes out of a Chicago APD television script:

“… some [being arrested] had to be slammed up against the hood of a car, a wall or the ground to gain compliance. Some had to be gassed, tazed, struck with a baton and, yes, some had to be shot. “

Without lapel camera footage or cell phone footage, or other witness testimony, only an arresting officer knows for sure if the use of force or deadly force is in fact justified and if a suspect was resisting a lawful arrest.

Only police officers themselves over the years before the consent decree know for sure if they did not help create, did not participate nor did not stop the “culture of aggression” within APD that took many years to become reality long before the DOJ investigation.

WHAT BROUGHT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO THE CITY

On April 10, 2014, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), Civil Rights Division, submitted a scathing 46-page investigation report on an 18-month civil rights investigation of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD).

The investigation was conducted jointly by the DOJ’s Washington Office Civil Rights Division and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico.

You can read the entire report here.

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2014/04/10/apd_findings_4-10-14.pdf

The DOJ investigation included a comprehensive review of APD’s operations and the City’s oversight systems of APD. The DOJ investigation “determined that structural and systemic deficiencies — including insufficient oversight, inadequate training, and ineffective policies — contribute to the use of unreasonable force.”

Based on the investigation and the review of excessive use of force and deadly force cases, the DOJ found “reasonable cause to believe that APD engage[d] in a pattern or practice of use of excessive force, including deadly force, in violation of the Fourth Amendment … . and [the] investigation included a comprehensive review of APD’s operations and the City’s oversight systems.”

Federal civil rights laws make it unlawful for government entities, such as the City of Albuquerque and APD, to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives individuals of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

The investigative report found a pattern or practice of use of “deadly force” or “excessive use of force” in 4 major areas:

1. The DOJ reviewed all fatal shootings by officers between 2009 and 2012 and found that officers were not justified under federal law in using deadly force in the majority of those incidents. Albuquerque police officers too often used deadly force in an unconstitutional manner in their use of firearms. Officers used deadly force against people who posed a minimal threat, including individuals who posed a threat only to themselves or who were unarmed. Officers also used deadly force in situations where the conduct of the officers heightened the danger and contributed to the need to use force.

2. Albuquerque police officers often used less lethal force in an unconstitutional manner, often used unreasonable physical force without regard for the subject’s safety or the level of threat encountered. The investigation found APD Officers frequently used take-down procedures in ways that unnecessarily increased the harm to the person. Finally, APD officers escalated situations in which force could have been avoided had they instead used de-escalation measures.

3. A significant number of the use of force cases reviewed involved persons suffering from acute mental illness and who were in crisis. The investigation found APD’s policies, training, and supervision were insufficient to ensure that officers encountering people with mental illness or in distress do so in a manner that respected their rights and in a manner that was safe for all involved.

4. The investigation found the use of excessive force by APD officers was not isolated or sporadic. The pattern or practice of excessive force stemmed from systemic deficiencies in oversight, training, and policy. Chief among these deficiencies was the department’s failure to implement an objective and rigorous internal accountability system. Force incidents were not properly investigated, documented, or addressed with corrective measures by the command staff.

What differentiates the DOJ’s investigation of APD from the other federal investigations of police departments and consent decrees is that the other consent decrees involve in one form or another the finding of “racial profiling” and use of excessive force or deadly force against minorities. The DOJ’s finding of a “culture of aggression” within APD dealt with APD’s interactions and responses to suspects that were mentally ill and that were having psychotic episodes.

The CASA and all 271 mandated reforms was necessitated because of APD’s actions and inactions from the Chief, APD management, the command staff all the way down to patrol officers. The April 10, 2014, DOJ investigation report reviewed all fatal shootings by APD officers between 2009 and 2012. The Department of Justice found excessive use of force and deadly force that was engrained into APD to the point that a “culture of aggression” existed.

CITY’S CONSENT DECREE UNIQUELY DIFFERENT FROM ALL OTHERS

What happened in the George Floyd case has happened in Albuquerque more than once, but it involved APD’s interaction with the mentally ill.

There are 18 consent decrees in the United States, all but one deal with racial profiling or systemic racism in one form or another. APD’s consent decree is significantly different. APD’s consent decree was brought about primarily because of APD’s inability to interact and deal with the mentally ill and those in crisis and as APD was attempting to take into custody for a suspected crime.

The 3 best examples are:

The 2010 shooting and killing of Kenneth Ellis, III, an Iraq War Veteran suffering post traumatic stress disorder and who had committed no crime, yet then Lt. Medina authorized the use of deadly force. The Ellis shooting resulted in $10.3 million judgement against the city.

The 2011 shooting and killing by APD of mentally ill Christopher Torres in his backyard by APD detectives dressed in plain clothes confusing Torrez. The Torrez shooting resulted in over a $6 million judgement against the city.

The 2014 killing of homeless camper and mentally ill James Boyd who was shot and killed by SWAT in the Sandia Foothills after APD attempted to arrest him for illegal camping. The Boyd killing resulted in a $5 million judgment against the city.

All 3 shootings were preventable, a clear violation of constitutional rights and wound up costing over $21 million in judgements.

APD has been struggling for over 6 years with trying to implement the DOJ consent decree reforms. After six years and millions spent, APD still has a long way to go to be compliant under the settlement before the case can be dismissed. The reforms were to be fully implemented in 4 years, and after 2 years of compliance in 3 areas determined to be 95% , the case was to be dismissed. APD management, the police union and rank and file have essentially done whatever they could do, and at different times, to interfere with the reform efforts.

The biggest failure made clear in Federal Court Monitor’s 12th report filed on November 2, 2020, relates to “Operational Compliance”. Operational Compliance is defined as “managements adherence and enforcement to APD policies in the day-to-day operation of APD” .

Operational compliance is where line personnel are routinely held accountable for compliance by their sergeants, and sergeants are routinely held accountable for compliance by their lieutenants and upper command staff. In other words, APD “owns” and enforces its own policies and without expecting the Federal Monitor to do it for them.

DERELICTION OF DUTY BY APD, NOT POLITICIANS THROWING IT UNDER BUS

The problem always has been and continues to be that APD management, the police union and its membership have not fully embraced the reforms. In fact, all three have resisted them from time to time, at different times, as has been repeatedly documented by the federal monitor in at least 4 reports over the last 3 years.

The argument made by the retired APD Area Commander that “this entire mess, settlement agreement/dual leadership is an unmitigated disaster that was preventable. We arrived here by the political inactions and lack of courage by our mayors and councils. They should have been the oversight when the chain of command faltered” is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to undercut and discredit the need for the reforms and deflect the blame where it belongs: APD management, the union and rank and file police.

FINAL COMMENTARY

The settlement agreement was indeed preventable had APD in fact followed constitutional policing practices in the first place. It had nothing to do with “politically correct politicians” throwing APD under the bus. It was APD that brought the DOJ here in the first place and mandated the Federal Court to come down on it.

Simply put, if a police officer does not want to do their job and not follow constitutional policing practices as mandated by the consent decree, they are part of the problem and need to leave APD or find another line of work. Same goes for anyone currently within APD management, such as Chief Harold Medina, who helped create, contributed or who did not stop the “culture of aggression” and who have resisted the reforms.

Below are 3 excellent summary reports by the Associated Press (AP) writers STEVE KARNOWSKI and AMY FORLITI, and one report by USA Today of the first two days of the George Floyd murder trial with links to the reports at the end of each report:

AP Headline: Witness in George Floyd case: ‘I witnessed a murder’
by: STEVE KARNOWSKI and AMY FORLITI, Associated Press

Posted: Mar 29, 2021 / 09:57 PM MDT / Updated: Mar 30, 2021 / 08:10 AM MDT

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A man who was among onlookers shouting at a Minneapolis police officer to get off George Floyd last May was to continue testifying Tuesday, a day after he described seeing Floyd struggle for air and his eyes rolling back into his head, saying he saw Floyd “slowly fade away … like a fish in a bag.”

After the day’s proceedings, a few hundred protesters gathered outside the courthouse. Speakers called for justice for Floyd and others whose lives were lost in encounters with police. One speaker, Jaylani Hussein, shouted: “Police officers are not above the law!” …

Links to AP Reports are here:

https://thebrunswicknews.com/ap/national/witness-describes-seeing-floyd-slowly-fade-away/article_8b0242a3-984a-563f-841d-97ee3b96c5fb.html

https://www.krqe.com/news/national/witness-describes-seeing-floyd-slowly-fade-away/?fbclid=IwAR3GDS6zUXJaOz9qpz3IqWJuiwtsY_SsT30xrU88Wv4kAZxrjM1BQU1lDKU

DONALD WILLIAMS TESTIMONY

“[Donald Williams] … testified Tuesday that he called 911 after paramedics took Floyd away, “because I believed I witnessed a murder.”

Floyd, 46, had none of the telltale signs of asphyxiation and had fentanyl and methamphetamine in his system, Nelson said. He said Floyd’s drug use, combined with his heart disease, high blood pressure and the adrenaline flowing through his body, caused a heart rhythm disturbance that killed him.”

The link to the full AP Report is here:

https://apnews.com/article/derek-chauvin-trial-latest-updates-bba19d0f75c2cd71c135eed69f5e8200

OTHER WITNESS TESTIMONY

“Onlookers grew increasingly angry as they begged Minneapolis Officer Derek Chauvin to take his knee off George Floyd’s neck, but Chauvin would not let up, and another officer forced back members of the crowd who tried to intervene, witnesses testified Tuesday at Chauvin’s murder trial.

“I stay up at night apologizing to George Floyd for not doing more … not saving his life,” she said, adding of Chauvin: “It’s not what I should have done; it’s what he should have done.” “

https://apnews.com/article/derek-chauvin-trial-latest-updates-bba19d0f75c2cd71c135eed69f5e8200

USA TODAY REPORT ON GENEVIEVE HANSEN TESTIMONY

USA Today published the following report, with the link, on the testimony of Genevieve Hanson:

Genevieve Hansen, 27, a Minneapolis firefighter with state and national EMT certifications testified … Hansen said the vast majority of the calls she’s assigned are medical calls. She said she had been working as a firefighter for a little over a year and was off-duty on a walk last Memorial Day when she saw flashing lights and heard a bystander yelling.

In a 911 call Hansen made following the incident, she said, “I literally watched police officers not take a pulse and not do anything to save a man,” according to a recording played for the jury.

The link to the full USA Today report is is here:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/03/30/derek-chauvin-trial-live-tuesday-witnesses-take-stand-donald-williams/7018720002/

Reporters: Grace Hauck, N’dea Yancey-Bragg, Kevin McCoy, Tami Abdollah, Eric Ferkenhoff

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

As a prosecutor for much of my 42 year career as an attorney, for the last 2 days I have been riveted watching the trial of Derek Chauvin charged with the murder of African American George Floyd.

What just blows my mind is how the “stars lined up” for the prosecution. More than one cell phone video taken by bystanders within a few feet of the incident, across the street video from a city surveillance camera that caught it all on camera, a professional Mixed Marshal Arts (MMA) fighter who witnessed the incident and could explain the difference between the kinds of chock holds, an off duty Fire Fighter and EMT taking a walk, witnessing the incident, offered to help and told no by the officers and who caught it on cell phone, and minors under 18 who testified under oath what they saw.

It would be a major mistake to assume that a conviction of the police officer is all but certain. Far from it. When it comes to prosecuting police officers, jurors are essentially asked to review the evidence from the standpoint of the police officers, not the witnesses to the event. The jury must decide if the officer’s use of force or deadly force was justified to protect themselves or others or for that matter if the force was reasonable given all the facts and circumstances.

Stay tune for the autopsy report as to the cause of death and the testimony that George Floyd had drugs in his system, Derek Chauvin acted as he was trained and that he was in fear for his life. A conviction required by a unanimous verdict and a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

A verdict must be unanimous for a conviction or acquittal and if only one juror feels that the police officer acted reasonably, a mistrial is declared.

On December 1, 2009, when former Mayor Richard Berry was sworn into office for his first term, the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) was the best trained, best equipped, best funded department in its history. APD was fully staffed with 1,100 sworn police officers.

Over 8 years, APD went from 1,100 sworn police to 853 sworn police all under the public safety leadership of Mayor Berry, his Chief Public Safety Officer Darren White and his appointed APD Police Chiefs Ray Schultz, Allen Banks and Gordon Eden.

When then New Mexico State Auditor Tim Keller ran for Mayor, he ran in part on the platform of increasing the size of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) to 1,200 police and returning to “community-based policing” by the end of his first term. When Mayor Tim Keller assumed office on December 1, 2017, there were 861 full time sworn police according to the 2017-2018 city budget figures and payroll records at the time.

MASSIVE INVESTMENT, LITTLE RETURN

To keep his campaign promises on the police department, Mayor Keller order his Administration to begin implementing an $88 million-dollar APD police expansion program. The announced goal was to increase the number of sworn police officers from 861 positions filled to 1,200, or by 339 sworn police officers, over a four-year period. Keller promised to increase the number of sworn police in the department to 1,200 by the end of his first term, proclaiming 100 new offices were being hired a year.

Candidate Tim Keller during a televised debate promised in clear words not to raise taxes without a public vote, even if it was for law enforcement or for public safety. In May, 2018, 4 months after Keller was sworn in as Mayor, the Albuquerque City Council enacted a gross receipt tax increase that raises upwards of $50 million a year. The Council dedicated 75% to public safety.

The tax was enacted in response to reports that the city was facing a $40 million deficit. Mayor Keller broke his promise to demand a public vote on the tax and signed off on the $50 million a year tax increase. He signed off on the tax increase without any fanfare and without proposing any alternative budgets dealing with the deficit. The $40 million projected deficit never materialized. The City Council never repealed the tax. Keller went on a spending binge.

APD PERSONNEL LEVELS

During the February 8, 2021, City Council Public Safety Committee, Interim Chief Harold Medina reported that APD has 957 sworn police. Of the 957 sworn police, Medina reported a mere 371 sworn police are in Field Services responding to calls for service or 39% of the entire sworn force. The 371 sworn police taking calls for service are spread out over 3 shifts and 8 area commands to patrol and based on crime rates in the areas. Medina also told the committee that Field Services has 6 area commanders, 18 lieutenants, 53 sergeant’s, 21 bicycle officers for a total of 511 officers assigned to field services. The problem is commanders, lieutenants, sergeant’s, and bicycle officers do not patrol the streets and are not dispatched to calls for service as are the field officers.

https://www.abqreport.com/single-post/zero-growth-for-apd

On April 14 the on line news ABQReports reported that APD reported having 998 officers during the first week of March, 2021, but a check of APD payroll reflects only 984 sworn officers. According to ABQReports:

“Losing 15 officers in one month is not a good trend, but in cities like Albuquerque, Portland and Seattle it is a way of life. A source within APD advised that dozens of officers have inquired about retiring and quitting. Who can blame them in today’s toxic atmosphere and another hot summer on the way.”

https://www.abqreport.com/single-post/forty-one-homicides

KELLER’S STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS

As of January 9, 2021, APD payroll showed there were 953 sworn officers with 48 cadets in the academy.

On March 14, 2021, Mayor Tim Keller held his third “State of the City Address”. It was held virtually and was a very slick and impressive one hour production of not just Mayor Keller speaking, but other members of his administration giving presentations, including newly appointed APD Chief Harold Medina and newly appointed Interim Public Safety Office Sylvester Stanley. A “YOU Tube” link to the State of the City Address is here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dteKgWmCnsI

Mayor Tim Keller boldly proclaimed during his March 14 State of the City address that he has made good on his promise to expand the ranks of APD by hiring 100 officers every year over the last 3 years. Keller said:

“We have honored our commitment to rebuild the ranks after decades of depletion. We have hired 100 new officers each year with another 100 on deck for this year. … It’s a big hole to climb out of when officers only have time to run from call to call. This is how we will end the days of just waiting for crime to happen and struggling to respond.”

ACTUAL NUMBERS CONTRDICTS KELLER

On March 21, 2021, it was reported that APD is just shy of 1,000 officers. APD previously said they were hoping to reach that milestone by the end of 2019. It was reported that in May 2019, APD had 957 officers, and in 2018 it had 850.

According to APD spokesman Gilbert Gallegos, after the graduation of APD’s March cadet class, APD has 998 sworn police officers. Gallegos had this to say:

“Right now, it has been kind of fluctuating in the past year. We get up to 1000, or maybe a little lower, than we do lose officers at a certain time of year. But, we only gain them two or three times a year on one date. We get a— like just now— last week added 45 officers, so that puts us up close to 1,000”.

According to Gallegos, in the last 3 years, APD has had about 100 officers resign or retire, which is fewer than the same time during the previous administration.

Gallegos acknowledge that the pace of growing the department has slowed and said:

“It’s tough going to kind of keep moving that up, inching up and up. … We’re doing more, actually we’ll announce something soon to help retain officers with the most experience, too. So, we’re putting out information to convince them that it’s worth their while to stay even longer. ”

Gallegos added that there are some large cadet classes coming through the pipeline.

When Gallegos was asked if he thinks the mayor will reach his goal of having 1,200 officers by 2022, he had this to say:

“I think so, yeah. I mean, we’ve hired over 300 right now. This next year is looking really good. I think we’re going to get there. The trick is, at the same time, keeping people from retiring and keeping that steady pace.”

A link to the news source is here:

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/apd-sees-growth-stall-in-recruitment-/6049312/?cat=500

CITY COUNCIL GUTS “ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY SAFETY” DEPARTMENT

During his March 14, State of the City Address and his March 22 announcement for reelection, Mayor Keller touted a revitalized public safety effort and his “innovative new safety department” called the “Albuquerque Community Safety” (ACS) department. His embellishment glossed over the truth and the new department likely has years before it will actually materialize and have any effect on crime.

The approved 2020-2021 City Council budget guts Mayor Keller’s plan for a new “Albuquerque Community Safety” (ACS) department. The ACS as originally presented by Mayor Keller was to have social workers, housing and homelessness specialists and violence prevention and diversion program experts. They were to be dispatched to homelessness and “down-and-out” calls as well as behavioral health crisis calls for service to APD. The new department was to connect people in need with services to help address any underlying issues. The department personnel would be dispatched through the city’s 911 emergency call system. The intent is to free up the first responders, either police or firefighters, who typically have to deal with down-and-out and behavioral health calls.

The City Council approved budget but slashed Keller’s proposed $7.5 million budget to $2.5 million for fiscal year 2021. The City Council removed virtually all of the positions originally proposed by Keller. Cut from Keller’s proposed budget for the new department were 83 employees and $5 million in staffing costs. The staffing cut include 53 security personnel, 9 parking enforcement employees and 6 people from the city’s crossing guard program. The City Council’s budget gives the department a mere 13 positions. The positions include 7 civilian employees from the APD Crisis Outreach and Support Teams, and 3 Family and Community Services Department staffers which include one social worker and 2 people who respond to homeless encampments.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It is simply false when Keller says there has been “decades of depletion” of APD. The depletion occurred over 8 years under former Mayor Richard Berry and it continued for another 3 years under Mayor Tim Keller.

Simply put, Keller at worse lied in his state of the city address or at best intentionally mislead people as to how poorly his administration has done with recruiting and retention of sworn police. The poor performance on recruiting is after significant salary increases and large longevity or retention pay increases his administration handed out his first year in office agreeing to a two-year police contract which expired on July 1, 2020.

RESONS WHY RECRUITING AND TRAINING A NEW GENERATION OF YOUNGER POLICE OFFICERS DIFFICULT

Reasons Why Recruiting younger, new generation of sworn police officers and growing the size of the police department is difficult for any number of reasons including:

1. APD’s poor and negative national reputation.
2. Albuquerque’s high violent crime rates are not conducive to attracting people who want to begin a long-term career in law enforcement in Albuquerque.
3. The increased dangers of being a police officer in a violent city such as Albuquerque.
4. The DOJ oversight requirements.

APD consistently has thousands of applicants that apply to the police academy every year. The overwhelming number of police academy applicants fail to get into the academy for any number of reasons including failing to meet minimum education and entry qualifications, unable to pass criminal background checks, unable to make it through psychological background analysis, failing the polygraph tests, lying on the on the applications or failing a credit check. Once in the police academy, many cadets are unable to meet minimum physical requirements or unable to handle the training and academic requirements to graduate from the academy and drop out.

PAY RATES AND RETENTION BONUSES

When APD Spokesman Gilbert Gallegos says “We’re doing more, actually we’ll announce something soon to help retain officers with the most experience” what he is likely talking about is more money for retention bonuses. Paying more money to APD police officers to stay has been tried before, and it still has not worked. APD pay is already some of the highest law enforcement pay in the country when you add base pay, overtime, longevity pay, insurance benefits and retirement program and the city is still having a problem with retentions of experienced cops.

The 160 top wage city hall wage earners employed by the Albuquerque Police Department include patrol officers first class, sergeants, lieutenants, commanders the deputy chiefs, and the chief with annual pay ranging from $101,000 a year up to $192,937 a year. Far more Police Officers 1st Class are earning 6 figures under the Keller Administration than under the last year of the Berry Administration.

Starting pay for an APD Police Officer immediately out of the APD academy is $29 an hour or $60,320 yearly. (40 hour work week X 52 weeks in a year = 2,080 hours worked in a year X $29 paid hourly = $60,320.)
Police officers with 4 to 14 years of experience are paid $30 an hour or $62,400 yearly. (40-hour work weeks in a year X 52 weeks in a year = 2,080 hours worked in a year X $30 paid hourly = $62,400.)
Senior Police Officers with 15 years or more experience are paid $31.50 an hour or $65,520 yearly. (40 hours work in a week X 52 weeks in year = 2,080 hours worked in a year X $31.50 = $65,520.)
The hourly pay rate for APD Sergeants is $35 an hour, or $72,800. (40-hour work week X 52 weeks in a year = 2080 hours worked in a year X $35.0 paid hourly = $72,800.)
The hourly pay rate for APD Lieutenants is $40.00 an hour or $83,200. (40 hour work week X 52 weeks in a year = 2080 hours worked in a year X $40.00 = $83,200.)

LONGEVITY PAY ADDED TO BASE PAY

In addition to the base pay rates, APD police officers are also paid longevity bonus pay added to their pay at the end of the year. Following are the longevity pay rates:

For 5 years of experience: $100 are paid bi-weekly, or $2,600 yearly
For 6 years of experience: $125 are paid bi-weekly, or $3,250 yearly
For 7 to 9 years of experience: $225 are paid bi-weekly, or $5,800 yearly
For 10 to 12 years of experience: $300 are paid bi-weekly, or $7,800 yearly
For 13 to 15 years o experience: $350 are paid bi-weekly, or $9,100 yearly
For 16 to 17 years or more: $450 are paid bi-weekly, or $11,700 yearly
For 18 or more years of experience: $600 are paid bi-weekly, 15,600 yearly

When the Keller Administration announced the new retention bonuses, they said it should do the trick and stop more cops from leaving, but it did not.

FALSE NARRATIVE

It is simply false when APD Spokesman Gilbert Gallegos says in the last three years, APD has had about 100 officers resign or retire, which is fewer than the same time during the previous administration. Gallegos is either intentionally misleading or he flunked basic math in school.

It’s is not difficult to understand the math and find the truth. When Keller was sworn into office there were 861 sworn police. If the Keller Administration in fact has hired 100 new officers a year over the last 3 years as they claim, you add the new 300 sworn police to the 861 sworn when Keller became Mayor to arrive at a 1,161-total number. You then subtract the current number of 998 from the 1,161 total which means APD lost 163 sworn police over the last 3 years, not just 100 as Gilbert Gallegos claimed. In other words, more than 50% of the 300 hiring gains over the last 3 years have been lost to retirement, transfers or terminations and and need to be replaced.

On March 22, Mayor Keller announced that he is running for a second term with the election to be held on November 4. One key platform that he has promised is to create a new Public Safety Department and hire social workers deal with many calls for service. It is difficult to comprehend that the Keller Administration will be any more successful creating the department than it has been in fully staffing APD at 1,200 full time police.

At the pace the Keller Administration is going, it will be at least another 3 years, perhaps 4, to get to the 1,200-total number of sworn police as promised by Keller. With that kind of record, it’s not at all likely that Keller’s new department of public safety will materialize.

No wonder Tim Keller wants another term. Without 4 more years, he has broken his promises to get the job done by the end of his first term. All of Keller’s broken promises when it comes to APD reminds me of former Governor Bruce King when he said “I may have promised, but I never gave you a firm commitment.”

On Sunday, March 28, the following guest opinion column entitled “Dual leadership has never worked for officers or residents” written by Retired APD Area Commander David “Marty Gilmore” was published by the Albuquerque Journal:

“Mayor Tim Keller’s dual leadership at APD is bound to fail as other attempts have. It is reminiscent of the Chief Gorden Eden-Assistant Chief Huntsman era and those that followed. One of the mayor’s prime issues when he ran for office was tackling the crime issue; he has failed. He refuses to consider anything short of liberal policing methods. He appointed a new “superintendent of police,” then announced a national search for one. I can visualize Councilor Trudy Jones throwing up her arms in bewilderment when she commented on the plan for dual leadership.

A once proud, nationally recognized, effective APD is in total shambles, and life for the officers and crime is only going to get worse. But alas, the new dual leadership at APD will “right” the sinking ship.

The link to the Albuquerque Journal guest column is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2374261/dual-leadership-has-never-worked-for-officers-or-residents.html?fbclid=IwAR1PhW_VsEQA6GRxLLyssKTojuDrdms5XPqgNeK37V4HpSXONeD_U_U3h7Q

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

In his Albuquerque Journal “Letter to the Editor”, retired area commander Marty Gilmore is 100% correct with his assessment of Chief Harold Medina and the likely result of the dual leadership of APD. Gilmore is also 100% dead wrong when he says “politically correct politicians shoved us under the settlement agreement bus”. Former Commander Gilmore without a doubt is sincere in his opinions and needs to be thanked for his years of service to the city and the department. With that said, he retired years before the Department of Justice (DOJ) Court Approved Settlement Agreement and he was part of management before the DOJ came to Albuquerque. When Gilmore says “… some [being arrested] had to be slammed up against the hood of a car, a wall or the ground to gain compliance. Some had to be gassed, tazed, struck with a baton and, yes, some had to be shot” only he knows for sure if his use of force was in fact justified and if they were resisting a lawful arrest. Only he knows for sure if he did not help create, did not participate nor did not stop the “culture of aggression” within APD that took many years to become reality long before the DOJ investigation.

The CASA and all 271 mandated reforms was necessitated because of APD’s actions and inactions from the Chief, APD management, the command staff all the way down to patrol officers. The April 10, 2014, DOJ investigation report reviewed all fatal shootings by APD officers between 2009 and 2012. The Department of Justice found excessive use of force and deadly force that was engrained into APD to the point that a “culture of aggression” existed.

The DOJ specifically found three patterns of excessive force by APD:

“APD officers too frequently use deadly force against people who pose a minimal threat and in situations where the conduct of the officers heightens the danger and contributes to the need to use force;

The department also found systemic deficiencies of the APD which contribute to these three patterns, including: deficient policies, failed accountability systems, inadequate training, inadequate supervision, ineffective systems of investigation and adjudication, the absence of a culture of community policing and a lack of sufficient civilian oversight.”

CITY’S CONSENT DECREE UNIQUELY DIFFERENT FROM ALL OTHERS

There are 18 consent decrees in the United States, all but one deal with racial profiling or systemic racism in one form or another. APD’s consent decree is significantly different. APD’s consent decree was brought about primarily because of APD’s inability to interact and deal with the mentally ill and those in crisis and as APD was attempting to take into custody for a suspected crime.

The 3 best examples are:

The 2010 shooting and killing of Kenneth Ellis, III, an Iraq War Veteran suffering post traumatic stress disorder and who had committed no crime, yet then Lt. Medina authorized the use of deadly force. The Ellis shooting resulted in $10.3 million judgement against the city

The 2011 shooting and killing by APD of mentally ill Christopher Torres in his backyard by APD detectives dressed in plain clothes confusing Torrez. The Torrez shooting resulted in over a $6 million judgement against the city.

The 2014 killing of homeless camper and mentally ill James Boyd who was shot and killed by SWAT in the Sandia Foothills after APD attempted to arrest him for illegal camping. The Boyd killing resulted in a $5 million judgment against the city.

All 3 shootings were preventable, a clear violation of constitutional rights and wound up costing over $21 million in judgements.

APD has been struggling for over 6 years with trying to implement the DOJ consent decree reforms. After six years and millions spent, APD still has a long way to go to be compliant under the settlement before the case can be dismissed. The reforms were to be fully implemented in 4 years, and after 2 years of compliance in 3 areas determined to be 95% , the case was to be dismissed. APD management, the police union and rank and file have essentially done whatever they could do, and at different times, to interfere with the reform efforts.

The biggest failure made clear in Federal Court Monitor’s 12th report filed on November 2, 2020, relates to “Operational Compliance”. Operational Compliance is defined as “managements adherence and enforcement to APD policies in the day-to-day operation of APD” .

Operational compliance is where line personnel are routinely held accountable for compliance by their sergeants, and sergeants are routinely held accountable for compliance by their lieutenants and upper command staff. In other words, APD “owns” and enforces its own policies and without expecting the Federal Monitor to do it for them.

DERELICTION OF DUTY BY APD, NOT POLITICIANS THROWING IT UNDER BUS

The problem always has been and continues to be that APD management, the police union and its membership have not fully embraced the reforms. In fact, all three have resisted them from time to time, at different times, as has been repeatedly documented by the federal monitor in at least 4 reports over the last 3 years.

The argument that “this entire mess, settlement agreement/dual leadership is an unmitigated disaster that was preventable. We arrived here by the political inactions and lack of courage by our mayors and councils. They should have been the oversight when the chain of command faltered” is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to undercut and discredit the need for the reforms. The settlement agreement was indeed preventable had APD in fact followed constitutional policing practices in the first place and it had nothing to do with “politically correct politicians” throwing APD under the bus. It was APD that brought the DOJ here in the first place and mandated the Federal Court to come down on it.

Simply put, if a police officer does not want to do their job and not follow constitutional policing practices as mandated by the consent decree, they are part of the problem and need to leave APD or find another line of work. Same goes for anyone currently within APD management, such as Chief Harold Medina, who helped create, contributed or who did not stop the “culture of aggression” and who have resisted the reforms.

On Thursday, March 25, 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that expands the ability of citizens to sue police officers for excessive use of force. It is a New Mexico case. The US Supreme Court ruled in favor of Roxanne Torres, a New Mexico woman who filed a civil rights lawsuit after being shot by officers she had mistaken for carjackers. The court held that police shooting at a fleeing vehicle “is a seizure even if the person does not submit and is not subdued” and therefor a violation of the 4th Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.

A link to the Supreme Court decision is here:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-292_21p3.pdf

The 5-3 decision allows Torres to pursue her lawsuit accusing New Mexico State Police officers Richard Williamson and Janice Madrid of violating the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on illegal searches and seizures even though she had not been immediately detained, or seized, in the incident.

FACTS OF CASE EXAMINED

According to the lawsuit filed, Torres alleged she was sleeping in her SUV in the parking lot of an apartment complex when two police officers wearing dark clothing and tactical vests approached her. They had blocked her car with their unmarked cruiser. The two state police were attempting to serve an arrest warrant on another woman.

According to the civil complaint filed, when the officers tried to open her car door, she thought they were carjackers and started to drive away, at which time the 2 state police opened fired and shot 13 times at the fleeing vehicle striking Torrez in the back. The 2 state police officers contended Torrez drove at them and said they feared for their lives and shot in self-defense, yet the vehicle was driving away and Torrez was shot in the back.

Torres later crashed the car, stole another vehicle and managed to drive more than 80 miles to a hospital in Grants where she was treated. Torres was arrested the next day. She was convicted of 3 criminal offenses, including fleeing from a law enforcement officer.

THE RULING

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote:

“The question in this case is whether a seizure occurs when an officer shoots someone who temporarily eludes capture after the shooting. The answer is yes: The application of physical force to the body of a person with intent to restrain is a seizure, even if the force does not succeed in subduing the person.”

In a dissenting opinion, conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch said a “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment has always been defined as “taking possession of someone or something,” and he criticized the majority court’s contrary conclusion by saying:

“That view is as mistaken as it is novel. … Our final destination confuses a battery for a seizure and an attempted seizure with its completion. … All this is miles from where the standard principles of interpretation lead and just as far from the Constitution’s original meaning.”

CASE REINSTATED

In 2016, Torres sued in a federal court in New Mexico. The Federal District Court judge dismissed the case ruling that there could be no excessive force claim because a “seizure” had not occurred. In 2019, the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reached the same conclusion, prompting Torres to appeal to the United Sates Supreme Court.

The case will now return to lower courts, where the State Police officers could seek to have the lawsuit dismissed on other grounds including the legal doctrine called qualified immunity that protects police and other types of government officials from civil litigation in certain circumstances.

Links to news coverage are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/us-supreme-court-reinstates-albuquerque-womans-excessive-force-lawsuit-against-nmsp/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2373603/us-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-albuquerque-woman.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-police/u-s-supreme-court-widens-ability-to-sue-police-for-excessive-force-idUSKBN2BH2I5

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

This Supreme Court ruling is a remarkable decision in that Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion and was joined by conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh and liberal Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan. Conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett was not on the bench when the case was heard on October 14, 2020 and did not take part in consideration of the case.

This US Supreme Court case will no doubt send shock waves throughout all law enforcement agencies in the country. Many, but not all, law enforcement standard operating procedures prohibit shooting at fleeing suspects in cars. There is a very good reason for that. Stray bullets do not hit their targets and innocent bystanders can easily be hit and killed by mistake. In the Torrez case, only 2 out of 13 rounds fired hit Torrez and there is no mention as to what the 11 other bullets hit.

The decision is of particular interest and relevant to the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) because of the Department of Justice consent decree entered into after the DOJ found a “culture of agression” within APD and its use of excessive force and deadly force. One of the 271 mandated reforms is that APD Officers are strictly prohibited from shooting at fleeing vehicles.

With respect to the State of New Mexico, the 2021 legislature that just ended enacted the New Mexico Civil Rights Act. City, county and state law enforcement can now be sued for civil rights violations for shooting at a suspect fleeing in a vehicle and “qualified immunity” will not be able to be used as a defense as it is allowed in Federal Court cases for civil rights violations.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines a “mass murderer” as someone who “kills four or more people in a single incident, typically in a single location” and not including the killer who takes their own life.

The federal government has never defined “mass shooting” as a separate category. There is no federal crime definition of the term. Although there is no official or number as the threshold that distinguishes a mass shooting from other violent crimes involving a firearm, the common approach by the media and law enforcement is to adopt the FBI’s criteria for a mass murderer setting casualty threshold of 4 fatalities by firearm, excluding the offender or offenders.

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/essays/mass-shootings.html

SEVEN MASS SHOOTINGS IN SEVEN DAYS

In seven days, there have been 7 mass shooting in the United States. The 7 mass shootings are as follows:

On March 22, in Boulder, Colorado, Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, 21, of Arvada, near Denver, opened fired at the King Soopers store killing 10 people, including a Boulder police officer, ranging in age from 20 to 65. The motive in the Boulder killings was not immediately known. Subsequent reports are that Alissa is suffering from severe mental illness and a violent personality disorder. He purchased the assault weapon he used a mere 6 days before the shooting.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/23/us/boulder-colorado-shooting-tuesday/index.html

On March 16, Robert Aaron Long, 21, of Woodstock, Georgia., was arrested for shooting to death 8 people, including six women of Asian descent, at a string of Atlanta-area spas. Long told authorities he had a “sexual addiction” and wanted to get rid of the temptation that the establishments represented. The murders fueled fears that the victims were targeted because of their race. Authorities said Long frequented the places in the past and may have been lashing out but said that racism did not appear to be the motive.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2021-03-16/7-killed-in-shootings-at-3-atlanta-area-massage-parlors

On March 17, in Stockton, California, 5 people who were preparing for a vigil in Stockton, in California’s Central Valley, and were shot in a drive-by shooting. None had life-threatening injuries.

On March 18, in Gresham, Oregon, 4 victims were taken to the hospital after a shooting in the city east of Portland.

On March 20, in Houston, Texas, 5 people were shot after a disturbance inside a club. One was in critical condition after being shot in the neck, the rest were in stable condition.

On March 20, in Houston Dallas, 8 people were shot by an unknown assailant, one died.

On March 20, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 5 were injured and 1 person killed during a shooting at an illegal party. According to the Philadelphia Police Commissioner, there were at least 150 people that fled and believing they had to flee for their lives.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/colorado-king-soopers-shooting/index.html

NEWS UPDATE

On March 27, 2021 it was reported that at least 10 people were shot and two of them killed in a “chaotic” night of violence in Virginia Beach, the police said early Saturday morning. Officers arrived at a “resort area” on Atlantic Avenue late Friday night and found several shooting victims, the police said. Eight people were taken to the hospital with serious or life-threatening wounds, the police said. A woman who had been shot died at the scene. A man who was believed to be involved in the shooting on Atlantic Avenue was later shot and killed by officers, the police said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/27/us/virginia-beach-shootings.html?smid=fb-share&fbclid=IwAR3_TPbCpIdlo5gkfVwUU4VB_SOxWwYp4BoD7kHqIoyS26dnVZ6uSw0x4Fs

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/27/us/virginia-beach-shootings/index.html

HEARING IT ALL OVER AGAIN

The Boulder, Colorado and the Atlanta, Georgia incidents are again spurring discussion about gun control legislation in the United States. After the shootings we are again going through another news cycle of outrage, mourning and demands for gun control action. We are hearing the interviews of the survivors and witnesses of the shootings. Newscasters are warning “the images you are about to see may be too graphic, so you may want to turn away” from your TV set. There will be news accounts of the funerals and eulogies given.

Reports are being made how easy it was for the killers to get the guns. The killer’s FACEBOOK posts or YouTube videos that give hints about what they were about to do are being explored by authorities. Law enforcement and private citizens will describe the shootings as acts of “pure evil”. Reports are being made of the killer’s arraignments and the charges they are facing with the likelihood they will be sentenced to death or spend the rest of their lives in prison or in a mental institution.

Prosecutors are saying that these are the very type of crime that the death penalty is deserved to be imposed. Corrections officials will declare that the defendant has been placed on a suicide watch or that he has attempted suicide. We will hear calls for congress to enact responsible gun control laws and restrictions such as extensive background checks, outlaw gun shows, prohibit the manufacture and sale of the AR-15, prohibit the sale of firearms to anyone 18 or younger and outlaw the manufacture of high-capacity clips.

Psychologists and psychiatrists will give opinions about post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and that survivors will need to be treated for with counselling given on how to cope with death and loss of their loved ones. News accounts will include stories about the heroes and first responder’s reactions during the shooting and of those who lost their lives and of the lives they saved. There will be reports on the background and life of the troubled shooter and the mental illness they endured and what broken people they are.

The mantra “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” will be heard over and over again, as well as “if you take away guns from the law abiding, only the criminals will have guns.” The NRA will once again exert its influence over elected officials and make millions of campaign contributions to those running for office, both on a national and local level.

We will hear again, and again and again gun owners and gun advocates say the only way their guns will ever be taken away from them is when their gun is “pried from their cold dead hands”, even the high-capacity magazine rifles designed only to kill mass numbers or used by the military to inflict as much death as possible.

THE WEAPON OF CHOICE

The on-line publication Mother Jones has compiled a database of mass shooting from 1982 to the present. The data base is broken down by location, date, summary of the facts, the number of fatalities, and the number of injured. You can review the entire Mother Jones data base here:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

From 1982 to 2021, there have been 121 mass shootings in the United States. Since January 8, 2001, the United States has had 69 mass shootings with 607 people shot and killed.

The mass shooting with guns in the last 11 years include: Orlando, Florida (49 killed, 50 injured), Blacksburg, Va. (32 killed), San Ysidro, Cal (21 killed), San Bernardino, (14 killed), Edmond Oklahoma (14 killed), Fort Hood (13 killed), Binghamton, NY (13 killed) Washington, DC (12 killed), Aurora, Colorado (12 killed), Sandy Hook Elementary School, Newtown, Conn (21 children and 6 adult staff members killed) and the largest mass shooting in this country’s history that occurred in Las Vegas, Nevada with at least 59 dead and at least 515 wounded and the Parkland/Stoneridge High School shooting that resulted in 17 children’s deaths, El Paso, Texas, 23 dead and 23 injured, Atlanta, Georgia (Atlanta Message Parlor) 10 killed, Boulder, Colorado (Boulder Supermarket) 8 killed.

“The deadliest mass shootings … have had one thing in common: the perpetrator used an assault rifle. These weapons possess an incredible amount of killing power, and amplify the destructive will of the person who carries out an attack. Nine people died and 27 were injured in a mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio in an attack that lasted 32 seconds. The killer used an AR-15 style assault rifle. Since 1999, there have been 115 mass shootings with 941 people were killed and 1,431 were injured. Of those 115 attacks, 32 — just over a quarter — involved semi-automatic rifles. But those attacks accounted for 40% of all deaths and 69% of all injuries. Since 2017, 12 of the 31 mass shootings involved assault rifles — which caused 39% of the deaths and 92% of the injuries. That includes the Las Vegas massacre — which alone accounts for almost 40% of all mass shooting injuries since 1999. The perpetrator of that shooting used over 20 assault rifles during that attack.”

https://www.axios.com/deadliest-mass-shootings-common-4211bafd-da85-41d4-b3b2-b51ff61e7c86.html

PUBLIC OPINION SUPPORTING GUN CONTROL GROWS

On October 20, 2019 , NPR reported on a Pew Research Center survey released. The percentage of Americans who favor stricter gun laws was found to be on the rise, though significant partisan divisions persisted. The survey found that 60% of Americans say gun laws should be tougher, up from 57% in 2018 and 52% in 2017.

The study indicated that while a solid majority of Americans favor stricter gun laws, support remains split down party lines. 86% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said gun laws should be stricter than they are today, compared with 31% of Republican counterparts.

Large majorities of Democrats and Republicans somewhat or strongly support barring people with mental illnesses from purchasing guns, as well as making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks. But when it comes to banning high-capacity ammunition magazines and assault-style weapons, the parties diverge. Nearly 9 in 10 Democrats favor each of these proposals, compared with roughly half of Republicans.

The survey explores the relationship between gun control and gun rights. Overall, it found that 53% of Americans believe it is more important to control gun ownership, while 47% say it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns. Men are more likely to favor protecting gun rights, while women are more likely to favor controlling gun ownership.

The link to the full report is here:

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/20/771278167/poll-number-of-americans-who-favor-stricter-gun-laws-continues-to-grow

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It’s more likely than not that public support of gun control laws will continue to increase as more mass shootings with assault weapons occur, while all Republican Senators will continue to oppose such legislation.

There are many components to America’s mass shooting epidemic. We need more mental health treatment facilities, more parental involvement, better educational systems, early childhood intervention to prevent child abuse and to identify and get help and counseling to emotionally and violent children and more to secure our schools. This will take years but something can and needs to be done immediately.

There is no doubt that this country’s pandemic of mass shootings continues. Yet all we do about it is bury, debate and wait for the next mass shooting. After so many mass killings, it is difficult to refute that something needs to be done and done now about semi-automatic and automatic guns such as the AR-15 which are the type used in all the mass shootings.
The Unites States Congress needs to enact the following:

1. Ban the manufacture and sale of all assault weapons and regulate existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act of 1934, and initiate a federal gun buyback program.

2. Ban “bump-fire stocks” as was used in the Las Vegas mass shooting and other dangerous accessories.

3. Impose limits on high-capacity magazines.

4. Implementation of background checks on the sale of all guns.

5. Close the “Charleston loophole” or “delayed denial” where federally licensed dealers can sell guns if three business days pass without FBI clearance.

4. Call for the update and enhancement of the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check system (NCIS).

5. Institute mandatory extended waiting periods for all gun purchases.

6. Implement mandatory handgun licensing, permitting, training, and registration requirements.

7. Prohibit firearm sale or transfer to and receipt or possession by an individual who has: (1) been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor hate crime, or (2) received from any court an enhanced hate crime misdemeanor sentence.

8. Institute mandatory child access prevention safe storage requirements and prohibit the sales of handguns with “hair triggers”.

9. Provide more resources and treatment for people with mental illness.

10. Enhance accountability of federally licensed firearms dealers.

11. Implement micro stamped code on each bullet that links it to a specific gun.

12. Produce ‘x-mart guns’ with Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) or biometric recognition (fingerprint) capability.

13. Limit gun purchases to one gun per month to reduce trafficking and straw purchases.

14. Prohibit open carry of firearms.

15. Digitize Alcohol, Tobacco and Fire (ATF) gun records.

16. Require licensing for ammunition dealer.

INCLUDE GUN CONTROL IN NEW MEXICO LEGISLATURE SPECIAL SESSION

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has announced that she will be calling a special session to deal with the issue of legalization of recreational cannabis. She should include gun control legislation for the special session.

The New Mexico can and should consider any number of gun control measures. Those could include:

1. Repeal the New Mexico Constitutional provision that allows the “open carry” of firearms. This would require a public vote and no doubt generate heated discussion given New Mexico’s high percentage of gun ownership for hunting, sport or hobby.

2. Ban the sale of all assault weapons.

3. Prohibit in New Mexico the sale of “ghost guns” parts. Ghost guns are guns that are manufactured and sold in parts without any serial numbers to be assembled by the purchaser and that can be sold to anyone.

4. Requiring in New Mexico the mandatory purchase of “liability insurance” with each gun sold as is required for all operable vehicles bought and driven in New Mexico.

5. Enact a gun violence restraining order and extreme risk protection process to temporarily prohibit an individual deemed by a judge to pose a danger to self or others, from purchasing or possessing firearms or ammunition and allow law local law enforcement to remove any firearms or ammunition already in the individual’s possession.

6. Restrict and penalize firearm possession by or transfer to a person subject to a domestic violence protection order or a person, including dating partners, convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor.

7. Mandate the school systems and higher education institutions “harden” their facilities with more security doors, security windows, and security measures and alarm systems and security cameras tied directly to law enforcement 911 emergency operations centers.

FINAL COMMENT

What is needed at a minimum on federal level are prohibitions and the ban of the manufacture, sale and distribution to the general public of semi-automatic firearms, AR-15 style rifles, assault weapons, semi-automatic pistols, semi-automatic shotguns and weapons that result in the most murders in the shortest amount of time.

Until the United States congress does something to enact reasonable and responsible gun control measures and ban assault weapons, we can expect many more mass shootings at soft targets such as schools, movie theaters, malls, department stores and major public events like concerts and state fairs. The mass shootings will again be followed by the predictable cycle of news coverage, more outrage, more nighttime candle vigils, more funerals, more condolences, more rhetoric demanding action. Congress can end the madness but only they have the backbone to act.