Related stories:
• Column: Who is Damiani? Why does he carry a gun?
• Letter: Senator Damiani builds résumé

By M. CHARLES BAKST
Journal Staff Writer

When I noticed that gun-toting state Sen. Mike Damiani, a retired East Providence policeman, was emerging as the central figure in a debate over State House security, I sensed there might be a good column there.

And it was not because I particularly knew Damiani. I had only a casual acquaintance with him. I have patronized Riverside Cleansers, owned by his family, for decades, and I know his brother, Steve, who runs it, and an uncle, Mandy, who used to work there and who was always talking up the senator.

But I suspected there'd be a column because over the years -- believe it or not, beginning in 1968, when I covered a meeting about gun violence in the aftermath of the assassination of Bobby Kennedy -- I have always been struck by the extremism and vehemence of gun advocates.

They actually say -- indeed, Damiani told me he, too, believes this -- that:

1. Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

AND

2. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

I am an advocate of gun control.

Back to Damiani: One afternoon, when I didn't have much time and wasn't fully up to speed on the ongoing security debate, I stopped in the Senate chamber to talk to him and, in essence, scout out prospects for a column.

I knew I was on target, so to speak, when he told me how important it is to have a gun at all times, in the convenience store, at the bank, etc., and how he might have to kill a robber.

When I reminded him he is no longer a policeman, he replied, ``I spent my whole life as a policeman. Just because I had a heart attack and retired doesn't mean it's not in the blood anymore.''

As I said in the column, my head was spinning and I called it a day. I told the senator I'd get back to him.

Two days later, I returned to the State House to continue the conversation. As I was bopping around the building, I ran into a guy I know who asked what I was doing. I told him I was going to interview Damiani.

He said I should ask about something that supposedly happened during the Senate leadership fight between state Sens. William Irons and Paul Kelly: that Damiani, a Democrat and Irons ally, had hidden in a tree, sporting night goggles and wearing a camouflage outfit, to observe who was going into a meeting of Kelly supporters.

I sat down with Damiani. We went through questions such as why he thinks he needs a gun in the State House, whether he ever fired a gun in anger when he was a policeman (no), his relationship with the Riverside Cleansers business his late parents founded, his pets (including a ferret), and his views on gun control.

Now, I switched topics. I confirmed he had been an Irons backer and then methodically undertook a long and bizarre inquiry. Here, from the tape of the conversation, is how it began:

Question: Did you ever hide in a tree?

Answer: (Pause) How about if I don't answer the question.

Q. With night goggles, looking to see who was going to a meeting of Kelly senators?

A. I don't know where you hear these things.

Q. Senator, just answer me. Wearing camouflage?

A. I have no comment on all of that. My covert operations have nothing to do with the Senate.

Q. You own a pair of night goggles?

A. Yes.

Q. What do they do?

A. They amplify light, existing light.

Q. And do you own a camouflage uniform or suit?

A. Camouflage is my favorite color. My favorite color.

Q. So you own the equipment?

A. I own a lot of equipment.

Q. So you were in a tree. Why?

A. What does that got to do with what we're talking about?

Q. I'm trying to explain to people who you are and how you get passionate about things and so on.

A. We haven't established that I hid in a tree.

Q.. Did you or didn't you?

A. I'm reserving comment on that.

Q. Senator, you've got to help me here.

A. I've been helping you. I gave you 45 minutes of time up here. Have I ever been in a tree? I've been in a lot of trees.

Q. Did you stake yourself out in a tree in the Irons-Kelly fight?

A. Have I conducted surveillance? Absolutely.

Q. Did Senator Irons ask you to?

A. No.

Q. Did he know about it?

A. Probably after the fact. I can't tell you what he knows...

Q. Well, did you ever talk to him about it?

A. On occasion.

Q. Now, what is it that you did for him?

A. I wanted to know who was where (in the leadership fight) ...

Q. And it was a meeting - you wanted to see who was going into a meeting of Kelly senators?

A. Yeah, I was curious.

Q. So you put on goggles and camouflage and you hid in a tree and then what?

A. No camouflage. No camouflage.

And so it went.

With material like this, the column virtually wrote itself. I signaled at the beginning what I thought of it -- that in two interviews with Damiani, my head was spinning. But, basically, I then simply led the reader through our conversations and let his words speak for themselves.

The only fear I had about the column was the thought that the next time I walked into Riverside Cleansers someone might inform me I was no longer welcome there. When I did go in, Steve, the brother, gravely handed me a typewritten letter.

Uh-oh, I thought, here it comes. But on the contrary, the letter, addressed to me, was a blistering attack on the senator, partly for exaggerating his role in the business, and in general it conveyed the idea that the senator was an embarrassment.

The senator had told me he owns a portion of the business, so I described him as a part owner. But Steve said the senator owns only one of 100 shares that he had given him after the death of -- well, the original letter said, ``my'' parents.

Steve indicated he wanted to have the letter printed. I explained to him he would have to convert it to a letter to the editor -- for example, referring to ``M. Charles Bakst's column'' instead of ``your'' column. At some point, he revised the letter and sent it in. The version in the paper, though still sharp, was toned down.

I saw Steve the day it ran and he was beaming. He indicated it had worked out well. "Sometimes less is more,'' he said. Indeed, in journalism, too.