In September of last year, we wrote about a new wave of violent images being painted across Corvallis when swastikas were reported around town; Before that, we reported on what happened at the Oregon Capitol when a lawmaker let violent protesters in. So it came at no surprise when state auditors released a report that encourages the state government to consider strategies with “specific, measurable outcomes” to discourage extremist behaviors, including a legal definition of terrorism that would allow the state to prosecute terrorists.
According to data from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Oregon ranks sixth nationally for violent extremist attacks between 2011 and 2020.
Oregon state law neither defines nor criminalizes domestic terrorism, which makes it difficult to prosecute extremist violence that doesn’t precisely meet federal standards. Federal law defines domestic terrorism as life-threatening criminal behavior that occurs primarily in the United States with the intention of intimidating people or influencing policy.
The audit says that violent threats are becoming “increasingly complex and volatile” in Oregon, especially with the use of the internet to proliferate extremist ideas. It suggests that Oregon look to the examples of other states with clearly defined terrorism clauses.
In an interview with the Statesman-Journal, Audits Division Director Kip Memmott said that the recent attacks on the state and federal capitol buildings “clearly demonstrated the risk to public safety and the high cost on public resources.”
Memmott said that “our report notes that Oregon is especially at high risk for this type of violence.”
Per the Southern Poverty Law Center, there are 10 active hate groups in Oregon in 2021.
By Grace Miller
Do you have a story for The Advocate? Email editor@corvallisadvocate.com