Proposed Ban Could Kill Aerial Photography

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by Howard Dapp, Feb 27, 2013.

  1. Howard Dapp Active Member

    http://fstoppers.com/proposed-ban-could-kill-aerial-photography

    "Many states are struggling with how to deal with drone technology, more specifically “mini-drones” and the adoption of UAV’s by law enforcement. Spurred by this, Senator Neal Kurk has recently proposed a bill to squash any sort of aerial imagery.
    The bill says this:
    A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if such person knowingly creates or assists in creating an image of the exterior of any residential dwelling in this state where such image is created by or with the assistance of a satellite, drone, or any device that is not supported by the ground. This prohibition shall not apply where the image does not reveal forms identifiable as human beings or man-made objects. In this paragraph, “dwelling” means any building, structure, or portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more individuals."
  2. Tabb Firchau Administrator

    Time to move to New Zealand
  3. Brad Meier Moderator

    I always enjoy reading the comments on those articles. Everyone's an expert...
  4. Andy Johnson-Laird Administrator

    Of particular note is the emphasis below:
    A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if such person knowingly creates or assists in creating an image of the exterior of any residential dwelling in this state where such image is created by or with the assistance of a satellite, drone, or any device that is not supported by the ground. This prohibition shall not apply where the image does not reveal forms identifiable as human beings or man-made objects. In this paragraph, “dwelling” means any building, structure, or portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more individuals.

    See http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2013/HB0619.pdf (emphasis added).

    Note that this precludes any photography from commercial aircraft, jetliners, light aircraft, helicopters, and, oh yeah, copters and drones of dwellings where the images also includes forms identifiable as human beings.

    Allowing for the double-negative in the second sentence, we should rewrite this as "This prohibition applies if the image reveals human forms or man-made objects." So does that mean any evidence of humanity? Like roads, cities, farm fields?

    Is it just me, or is this getting slightly out of hand?

    Andy.
  5. Gary Haynes Moderator

    Tabb think Antarctica. No government. We could pass a law that all citizens are required to own a multi copter.
  6. Howard Dapp Active Member

    It's almost like this guy is trying to sell a car...go in with a ridiculously high proposal because he knows he'll be haggled down to a more reasonable number. There is no way this bill will pass, it's unrealistic and unreasonable as it is proposed now.
  7. Chris Babiana Member

    Well...then it's time for the government to take it's spy and imaging satellites out of orbit. What's good for the goose....

    Hampshire's House of Representatives Neal Kurk
    Office
    Statehouse
    107 N. Main St.
    Concord, NH 03301
    Phone: 603-271-3661
    Email: neal.kurk@leg.state.nh.us
    Home
    Rural Route 1
    Weare, NH 03281
    Phone: 603-529-7253

    The Streisand effect is the phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide or remove a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet. The term is a modern expression of the older phenomenon that banning or censoring something often makes that item or information more desirable, and leads to it being actively sought out to a greater extent than it would have otherwise been.
    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

Share This Page