Dennis Tuuri

Full PEAPAC Analysis

PEAPAC Explanation: If passed, Measur e 94 would repeal the mandatory minimum sentences passed into law by Oregon voters in 1994 under Measure 11. It is understandable that some people want to vote Yes on this Measure. Measure 11 reduced a judge’s discretion, while the Bible teaches that judges should, in cases other than murder, have a degree of discretion. (See our sidebar, “Judges Versus Computers”.) Also, anecdotal cases abound of young people whose futures have grown dark as a result of Measure 11’s response to foolish first time offenses. And we find the whole system of prison terms, short or long, suspect. We favor replacing much of our prison system with Biblical restitution. ( See our sidebar “Crime and Restitution”.)

Still, we think Measure 94 should be defeated. It would not move us one whit closer to restitution. But it would produce a wholesale softening of penalties for serious crime. It is civil government’s job to wield a sword, not a fly swatter, against those that do evil ( Romans 13:4) . We do not support Measure 94’s attempted wholesale rolling back of the sort of sure, strong, sword-like punishment for serious crimes that Measure 11 gave us. When the State does its job correctly, it is God’s minister, His servant. It is a ministry, a benefit, a service to a potential criminal to know that he will surely be punished strongly for an offense. It is a benefit for the criminal and society alike to leave most of what Measure 11 accomplished intact for now. The Legislature is the proper place to do the required fine-tuning of Measure 11, and to press for implementation of restitution. We recommend a No vote on Measure 94.

Related Measures

Measure 11 (1994) — Original mandatory minimum sentencing measure. View →