HELENA, Mont. (Feb. 27, 2015) – Two bills that would work together to stop the state from conducting mass, warrantless surveillance and help block some of the effects of federal spying programs passed the Montana House yesterday.Details
Whenever the NSA slips up and actually tells the truth, it becomes obvious why they are so deceptive: the truth reveals them to be frighteningly cold, callous and malicious.Details
There should be no local police, no county sheriff’s deputies and no state law enforcement officers involved. If states would simply quit cooperating, many of these constitutional violations would not happen. The feds don’t have the resources. They depend on state and local help.Details
A bill has passed through the Texas State Senate that aims to protect the privacy of their residents from the police state by instituting strict limitations on the use of unmanned drones in surveillance by law enforcement.
Dubbed the ‘Texas Privacy Act’, H.B. 912 is an attempt to rein in potential abuses related to the rapidly-developing drone technology that has made its hands into the hands of government at the state and federal levels. The bill was originally authored by Rep. Gooden (R-District 4) and has amassed over 100 co-sponsors since it was introduced Feb. 1, showing vast and bipartisan support for stopping the government’s Orwellian takeover of our skies.
The House passed the bill by a vote of 128-11 on May 10th. (roll call here) And last Friday the Senate passed a slightly amended version of the bill by a vote of 29-1. (roll call here). HB912 will now go back to the State House to either concur on the amendments or form a conference committee to approve a final version acceptable to both the House and Senate. Then it’s off to Governor Perry’s desk for a signature.
The bill states that “a person commits an offense if the person uses or authorizes the use of an unmanned vehicle or aircraft to capture an image without the express consent of the person who owns or lawfully occupies the real property captured in the image.” The offender would be charged with a Class C misdemeanor if they were caught violating this part of the law.
Data gathered by law enforcement illegally ‘may not be used as evidence in any criminal or juvenile proceeding, civil action, or administrative proceeding’ according to the bill and ‘is not subject to discovery, subpoena, or other means of legal compulsion for its release.’ This incentivizes police to not misuse the drone technology unless they wish to risk jeopardizing their entire investigation.Details
Add New Jersey to the long list of states opposing drone operations within their borders. Drone surveillance activity using unmanned aerial vehicles or “UAVs” has become an urgent issue threatening the right to privacy, recognized by the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. Anti-drone legislation recently introduced by Assemblywoman Quijano (D) and co-sponsored by Assemblywoman…Details
A bill introduced in the North Dakota State House of Representatives looks to protect the privacy of its residents from the police state by making a set of guidelines for the use of unmanned drones in surveillance by law enforcement.
House Bill 1373 was introduced by Reps. Becker, Anderson, Beadle, Heilman, Hofstad, Monson, Rohr, Toman, Hanson and Sen. Sitte. It was first read on Jan. 21 and referred to the Judiciary Committee where no action has presently been taken.
The bill comes in response to the growing national concern over predator drones, the controversial machines used to drop bombs onto people in foreign lands, coming to American skies en masse. Public safety concerns abound after repeated instances of crashes both domestic and abroad. Another troubling bit of information is that the Air Force maintains the right to spy on and collect data from drone missions about American citizens without so much as a warrant for up to 90 days as long as they claim it wasn’t intentional.
The text of HB 1373 states that “except as provided in section 4 of this Act, a law enforcement agency may not use an unmanned aircraft for surveillance of a person within the state or for the surveillance of personal or business property located within the borders of the state to gather evidence or other information pertaining to criminal conduct.” Section 4 of the Act gives law enforcement the right to use drones for weather-related catastrophes, exigent circumstances requiring reasonable suspecion to prevent immediate danger to life or bodily harm and national border patrol.Details
The world we live in is changed since the War on Terror began. That is a fact that cannot be denied. The truth is, anyone attempting to board an airplane is a potential terrorist. It is possible some of us could be without even knowing it.
To save us from ourselves, we have the Department of Homeland Security bravely labeling Christians, returning war veterans, pro-lifers, and many other groups unrelated to 9/11 as terror threats, just to be safe. And at our airports, we have the Transportation Security Administration engaging in enhanced patdowns and revealing scans of children, grandmothers and nuns. These are the people most effective at preventing shoe bombers and underwear bombers and assorted other wardrobe bombers from getting on the planes.
I for one feel safe knowing we have these aggressive measures in place to prevent another terror attack. But what happens if the wrong people get hired for the job? What happens if the terrorists infiltrate the TSA?
Enter brave citizen Carol Jean Price. A woman of 59 years, she was boarding a flight to Ohio when she was chosen for a patdown. After the procedure was completed, she asked to speak with a supervisor. According to other TSA Agents, she reached down and grabbed the leg and crotch of the TSA Agent to demonstrate what happened to her. A police report, according to the story on Wink News, was filed, along with charges of assault and resisting an officer. Similar incidents have occurred elsewhere, one in Miami, another in Phoenix.Details
Not a common thing these days, but a Federal judge ruled against the federal government on NSA wiretaps. From The New York Times: WASHINGTON – A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the National Security Agency’s program of surveillance without warrants was illegal, rejecting the Obama administration’s effort to keep shrouded in secrecy one of the…Details