This is the gun control debate in a nutshell. Governments don't want citizens to own guns so the people can never stand up to a tyrannical government. How different things would have turned out in Iran if the people had more than stones to fight back with against the government thugs carrying the guns.
June 30, 2009 | by TONY PHYRILLAS

June 24, 2009 | by Bill Graves, The Oregonian | OregonLive.com

SALEM—The Oregon House on Wednesday approved a bill that would toughen penalties for assaults against pregnant women, including, in cases of murder, life in prison without possibility of release or parole.

Legislators lined up in the back of the House to sign up as co-sponsors of House Bill 3505, prompted by the June 5 killing of Heather Snively, 21, of Tigard and her unborn son.

Korena Elaine Roberts, 27, has been charged with one count of murder in Snively's death and with cutting the child from Snively's uterus. But she was not charged with murdering the child. Snively was eight months pregnant and had named her baby John Stephen.

The House passed the bill 58-1 with Rep. Mitch Greenlick, D-Portland, opposing.

Rep. Jeff Barker, D-Aloha, quoted from William Shakespeare's "Hamlet" as he referred to Snively's death, calling it murder "most foul, strange and unnatural." He argued that the bill would automatically stiffen the penalty for murder when the victim is pregnant and would also increase penalties for other assaults against pregnant women.

But the tougher penalties would apply only if authorities have proof the assailant knew the victim was pregnant.

Killing a woman means possible parole after 25 years. But under House Bill 3505, killing a pregnant woman would automatically mean life imprisonment without possibility of release or parole unless a jury finds other mitigating circumstances.

Rep. Vicki Berger, R-Salem, said the bill provides "punishment to fit a crime" but does not attempt to confer human status on a fetus.

"This is not a fetal homicide bill," she said. "It's simply elevating the crimes against pregnant women."

Greenlick said the bill would not prevent crimes. Murder of a pregnant woman is terrible, he said, but so is murder of a tall woman, a short woman, a left-handed woman or a right-handed woman.

"What is the purpose? To make us feel better?" said Greenlick. "This crime was committed by a woman who was crazy. This bill won't change a thing."

Appeared in print: Saturday, Jun 20, 2009 | BY DAVID STEVES | The Register Guard

SALEM—Legislative Democrats struggled with mixed results over two major, controversial budget-balancing bills on Friday, approving a $6 billion schools spending plan that faces a veto from the governor but failing to pass a governor-endorsed plan to suspend the voter-approved Measure 57 criminal sentencing law.

Legislators have given themselves until June 30 to adjourn the session.

The House fell two votes shy Friday of the two-thirds majority needed to suspend the Measure 57 drug- and property-crimes law and to make other changes in criminal justice policy to save a combined $87 million in the biennum that starts July 1. Democratic leaders want to suspend the law in order to curb state corrections expenditures.

The vote signaled a rare defeat for Democrats and prompted them to warn that with time running out this session, the only viable cost-cutting alternative was to reduce other public-safety programs, including the Oregon State Police and the Oregon Youth Authority, which incarcerates juvenile offenders.

“The only way to keep our public safety system is this package (with Measure 57 suspension),” said Rep. Chip Shields, a Portland Democrat and one of four lawmakers who worked with the Kulongoski administration to fashion the bill. “It’s either this or the cuts.”

Those cuts, Democratic lawmakers said, would reduce the number of state highway troopers and fish and wildlife enforcement, and reduce forensic labs and Oregon Youth Authority juvenile lockups.

While 35 of the chamber’s 36 Democrats supported the Measure 57 bill, Republicans were nearly as united in their opposition: 20 of the 23 present voted against the bill initially, before one member, Rep. Dennis Richardson of Central Point, switched to “no” when it was clear the bill would fail.

“This bill breaks the promise to the voters, and it will only increase the crime rate by letting out more bad guys, increasing the number of property offenders,” said Rep. Kim Thatcher, R-Keizer, noting that the bill would suspend nearly all the provisions in Measure 57, seven months after it won statewide approval in last November’s election.

Rep. Tim Freeman, R-Roseburg, said Democrats were wrong to present only two options: roll back Measure 57 or cut public safety programs.

“We’re being asked to make a false choice,” he said. “What I cannot do and will not do is to be forced into this box.”

The vote was as much a showdown between legislative leadership and the state’s anti-crime movement as it was an inter-party conflict. District attorneys, Crime Victims United and the Oregon Anti-Crime Alliance had all lined up against the bill, saying they oppose changes in criminal justice policies in the name of solving a fiscal shortfall.

Besides suspending Measure 57 for most of the drug and property crimes committed before 2013, the bill would let prisoners shave 30 percent off their sentences — up from the current 20 percent — through good behavior. It also would reduce from 180 days to 60 days the jail time most lawbreakers would serve for violating terms of a felony probation.

The anti-crime coalition has been pushing an alternative, in which 2,000 state inmates who are serving sentences for nonviolent crimes would be released six months early.

After the vote, Rep. Jeff Barker, an Aloha Democrat who helped draft the failed proposal, said he’d like to see negotiations over a way to convince a couple of those who voted no to change their minds, or to rework the bill so it can pass.

“If the leadership does some horse trading, maybe something will happen, but I’m not optimistic,” Barker said.

The same afternoon, the Senate easily mustered 21 votes to pass a $6 billion schools budget, with only six votes in opposition. That proposal is expected to pass on Monday in the House — before being shot down by Gov. Ted Kulongoski, who has vowed to veto it. By the same 21-6 margin, the Senate also passed legislation drawing down the state’s education stability fund by $225 million to help fund that $6 billion price tag, leaving the education stability fund with $113 million in reserve.

The sticking point between the governor and the Legislature is how much money within the K-12 education budget should be held back in case the economy and state budget picture worsens.

Kulongoski warned Wednesday he would veto the bill because it appropriates $5.8 billion to Oregon’s 198 school districts and leaves $200 million in reserve, to be tapped only if the economy and state revenue are deemed capable of supporting the additional spending. That represents a change from the Legislature’s earlier plan, endorsed by Kulongoski, which would have spent $5.6 billion and left $400 million in reserve.

If the governor gets the bill by Monday, as planned, he will have five more working days to veto it. That would leave the Legislature with a day to override before the planned adjournment. Meeting the two-thirds override majority requires 40 votes in the House and 20 in the Senate. Legislative leaders have said they’re confident they can meet that requirement.

June 16, 2009 |By DAVID KROUGH, kgw.com Staff | kgw.com

SALEM, Ore. – A new bill seeking stricter punishment for anyone who attacks a pregnant woman got its first read in the Oregon Legislature this week.

The legislation comes in response to the murder of Heather Snively, 21, who was found dead inside the crawl space of her Beaverton home last Friday. Background: Pregnant woman killed

State Sen. Bruce Starr drafted legislation last week that would have criminalized the murder or manslaughter of an unborn child. The bill was updated without the unborn child clause, and seeks to increase penalties for an attack on or killing of a pregnant woman.

Heather Snively

Leg. Assistant Dawn Phillips said the aim was to help prosecutors in the Roberts case come up with a way to “make the punishment fit the crime,” since under current Oregon law, the unborn child was not considered a murder victim. The law says the state defines a person as having drawn a first breath.

“The current aggravated murder law includes court employees and victims under 14 among others,” Starr said. “I would argue pregnant women are certainly very vulnerable and need a special level of protection.”

“This legislation would provide long needed law that recognizes the seriousness of an assault of a pregnant woman and provides appropriate sanctions for the crime,” Washington County DA Bob Hermann said.

“No one should ever have to experience the loss we have,” Chris Popp, Snively’s boyfriend and former father-to-be said. “Losing not only one, but two family members makes this an aggravated crime.”

Popp also said they had set up a fund in Snively's name to help agencies that assist pregnant women. Donations could be given at any Bank of America.

HB 3505 increases this type of assault to a first degree crime with a maximum 20‐year sentence and $375,000 penalty.

It was awaiting a hearing.

June 15, 2009 |By KEENAN WEATHERFORD | mercurynews.com

Like many teenagers and young adults in Santa Cruz County, Justice Locatelli can discuss and defend his well-developed, informed political viewpoints.

But Locatelli, a 16-year-old junior at Monte Vista Christian High School, actually turned his passion for politics, specifically the Second Amendment, into a spot at the National Youth Education Summit YES, a week-long program in Washington that offers an opportunity for high school students to see America's political process in action, first-hand.

An avid marksman who said he goes target shooting and hunting on a regular basis, Locatelli's history with the Second Amendment starts with his family, active participants for five years of the Watsonvile and North Santa Cruz County chapters of Friends of the NRA, a nonpolitical subsidiary of the National Rifle Association. Half of the proceeds raised from the organization's annual dinner and auction go to local organizations like the Boy Scouts and law enforcement agencies, and half go to national organizations that promote firearm education.

"I've been interested [in the Second Amendment] for years," Locatelli said. "Of course it comes from my parents, to a point. When I started learning about it, I gained a lot more interest in it."

The YES program is sponsored by the NRA, the largest Second Amendment lobby group in the nation, and includes a tour of the White House and a chance to meet NRA Executive Vice President Wayne Lapierre. Locatelli is one of just 40 high schoolers accepted to the program. The application required a high school transcript, three letters of recommendation, a personal statement and a three-page essay on the Second Amendment.

Locatelli's essay, titled "Gun Control -- Can We Be Disarmed?" focused on the historical significance of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

"I went back to the Constitution and said that it's obviously our history," Locatelli said. "It's also our freedom, therefore we shouldn't have that taken away. The Second Amendment, to me, is your freedom to protect yourself or go out and have a fun day shooting."