Republican state rep Neal Kurk’s “A-” liberty rating (as per the NH Liberty Alliance) should take a tumble this year with his awful “anti-drone” legislation that threatens all people with criminal charges for photographing houses from the sky. This would restrict anyone, private or government, from flying a camera-equipped drone or even taking photos by satellite, which would mean he’s even targeting Google Maps!
Kurk’s proposed legislation doesn’t even address drones with guns – only photography!
His behavior on-camera is as ridiculous as his legislation as he covers his face and escapes from Dave Ridley‘s questions:
Most people I know like the bill in it’s current form. What is your issue with it? I recommend you contact the sponsor or wait until it gets to the NH Senate and contact the Committee there with your suggestions on improving the bill.
[…] View original article. […]
It seems as though Dave Ridley didn’t even read the bill before he made the video 🙁 Everyone makes mistakes, though. Perhaps (or very likely?) even Ian made a mistake by posting this the way he did.
the video pretty much speaks for itself. I’ve read the bill, and it’s bullshit. It’s anti-liberty and pro-government. Furthermore, Mr. Kurk shows himself as a coward and a hypocrite and his rating should be amended immediately. I’m not planning on contacting any of the assholes that pretend to represent me to give my imput. I’ll simply build a drone and fly it over Kurk’s house.
I echo @Keith Smith’s words below. What’s wrong with the bill, exactly? Why do you find it objectionable?
The bill bans aerial photography and makes an exception for law enforcement… Arial photography banned for us and not banned for Governments… It’s as simple as that.
The bill certainly didn’t do that. However, your wish is granted. It was tabled.
There’s a big surprise. Object to any laws restricting my rights to photograph anything from any point I’m allowed to be in. I’m allowed in the air, in my car, on roads, on my property, and on anything owned by the “public”. It’s time people get used to this principle.
Keith, the language is pretty clear. It restricts anyone but those conducting investigations into criminality: http://www.nhliberty.org/bills/view/2013/HB619
Every other arial photo of a home is banned.
Yeah, it’s pretty straightforward, and is nothing /but/ a restriction… there’s no pro-liberty side to that bill, at all.
right, where does the pro-liberty part come in? If I want to take an arial photo of my town, I become a criminal.
@Ian Freeman
Why oppose it? A clarification is needed now.
Uh, because it bans arial photography by anyone at all so long as a house is in the photo.
Wouldn’t this outlaw things like Google Maps, and such?
Seems like the bill will give cops a reason to stop, investigate and arrest anyone operating a drone near ANY residence, even if they happen to be videoing the actions of police at the time.
Indeed – it would actually /outlaw/ recording the police with a drone. Personally, if the cops were breaking into my house, I’d be happy if some independent individual had a drone recording the action.
[…] Anti-photo State Rep: http://freekeene.com/2013/03/11/anti-photo-freedom-state-rep-cowers-from-ridleys-camera/ […]
[…] Zerocoin for Bitcoin: http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/one… Anti-photo State Rep: http://freekeene.com/2013/03/11/anti-… Banner Ads are Now Available for Derrick J’s Victimless Crime […]