Governor Kate Brown Is Relaxed on Crimes and Criminals

Is "Public Safety" a concern to Governor Kate Brown?

Op-ed

Shortly after upsetting prosecutors, Governor Kate Brown of Oregon has called for leniency for dangerous criminals by refusing to deal with a wave of violent crimes.

State and local officials, led by State Representative and government candidate Christina Drazin, continue to put Gov. Kate Brown on notice for her recent use of lenient powers, including her decision in November to commute 70 convicted felons. Reduced sentences for inmates under serious crimes.

There are also a large number of violent criminals and sex offenders receiving Probation, instead of prison time. When you have family members who get assaulted, molested, or raped, and then see that the predator only gets Probation, it's a slap in the victims face and a high-five for the criminal.

These actions by the Governor have victims and families worried and feeling unsafe within their communities. Many of these families are urging others that "it might be time to move out of Oregon".

It's becoming apparent to Oregonians that Gov. Kate Brown is a pro-criminal and anti-victims activist, and is choosing to put this on display through her unjust actions.

Keeping communities safe and protecting families from criminals is one of the responsibilities of the Governor, who has the authority to influence new legislation that keeps communities safe and criminals locked up.

According to the Oregon Constitution, Article 5 Sec. 10, it states that the Governor "..shall take care that the Laws be faithfully executed." In other words, the Oregon Constitution charges the governor with faithfully executing the laws, making recommendations to the Legislature, and transacting all necessary business of state government.

In this video below, Gov. Kate Brown is said to have released a murderer from prison without notifying the victim. Another example of the governor putting the criminal first. 

The governors priorities are focused more on forcing mask mandates on families and releasing criminals, rather than protecting those families from dangerous people. It is believed that violent criminals and sex offenders are 'more than likely' to commit another crime if they receive a prison sentence of less than 10 years. According to Kate Brown, she believes long sentences for convicted felons is unfair which is why she began with commuting 70 criminals. But on the other hand, we have victims (that actually suffered harm) that believe 10+ years is not long enough.

Hypothetical question: if Kate Brown was violently attacked or sexually victimized, would she demand justice of 10+ years on the criminal? Or would she just give the criminal a high-five and offer them Probation? The scale on this, based on her actions, is leaning more toward the ladder, but it's a great question to ask a sitting governor that is blind to the wishes of victims.

As Oregonians know, soft on crime policies don't work. Recidivism is a real thing and should be taken seriously. Where are the victim rights activists?

This article is the view of the author, and not the view of mixreads.com