Ohio House introduces bill to criminalize AirTag stalking
A bill has been submitted to the Ohio House to try and criminalize using electronic tags for tracking people without permission, the latest legislative attempt to curtail AirTag stalking.
Apple's AirTag has courted controversy by being an accessible way for some would-be stalkers to keep track of potential victims, despite the various anti-stalking measures built into the device. On Friday, Ohio took a step towards making it illegal to perform AirTag-based stalking.
Introduced to the Ohio House, bill HB672 seeks to amend section 2903.211 of the Revised Code to prohibit anyone from "knowingly installing a tracking device or application on another person's property without the other person's consent." The bill is sponsored by Rep. Emilia Strong Sykes (D) and Rep. Tom Patton (R ).
The litigation was created in part due to a decision by 3News to actively advocate for bipartisan legislation over unwanted monitoring and tracking, with the news organization lobbying legislators over the matter. 3News also reported on loopholes in Ohio law that would've enabled such tracking to take place if there had not been any prior patterns of stalking behavior or domestic violence.
Under such circumstances, it is possible for the perpetrator not to receive any penalty for the act.
"This was an issue that I was not aware about, until you contacted us, and I'm so grateful that you were advocating for one of our constituents as she was very nervous, scared, and confused about the fact that someone could perpetuate such an offensive act against her," said Sykes. "Now we are acting on her behalf, and as well as others who have experienced these types of situations, or who may be subjected to them in the future."
According to the report, at least 19 states have specific laws against electronic tagging. Ohio wasn't among them.
The bill follows interest by other legislative bodies about the potential misuse of AirTag. In January, legislation in Pennsylvania was proposed to specifically make AirTag-based stalking punishable.
In February, New York attorney general Letitia James issued a consumer alert warning about AirTag stalking.
Read on AppleInsider
Apple's AirTag has courted controversy by being an accessible way for some would-be stalkers to keep track of potential victims, despite the various anti-stalking measures built into the device. On Friday, Ohio took a step towards making it illegal to perform AirTag-based stalking.
Introduced to the Ohio House, bill HB672 seeks to amend section 2903.211 of the Revised Code to prohibit anyone from "knowingly installing a tracking device or application on another person's property without the other person's consent." The bill is sponsored by Rep. Emilia Strong Sykes (D) and Rep. Tom Patton (R ).
The litigation was created in part due to a decision by 3News to actively advocate for bipartisan legislation over unwanted monitoring and tracking, with the news organization lobbying legislators over the matter. 3News also reported on loopholes in Ohio law that would've enabled such tracking to take place if there had not been any prior patterns of stalking behavior or domestic violence.
Under such circumstances, it is possible for the perpetrator not to receive any penalty for the act.
"This was an issue that I was not aware about, until you contacted us, and I'm so grateful that you were advocating for one of our constituents as she was very nervous, scared, and confused about the fact that someone could perpetuate such an offensive act against her," said Sykes. "Now we are acting on her behalf, and as well as others who have experienced these types of situations, or who may be subjected to them in the future."
According to the report, at least 19 states have specific laws against electronic tagging. Ohio wasn't among them.
The bill follows interest by other legislative bodies about the potential misuse of AirTag. In January, legislation in Pennsylvania was proposed to specifically make AirTag-based stalking punishable.
In February, New York attorney general Letitia James issued a consumer alert warning about AirTag stalking.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
Installing is a weird word too. I wouldn't describe slipping an AirTag into a pocket as installing anything. Probably just legal jabber though.
Add a separate law regarding the misuse of tracking devices, and it becomes a separate charge for a separate but possibly related crime, and possibly even becomes the legal means to hold a stalker to account. For instance: 'Did the defendant place a tracking device in the alleged victim's car? Yes. Is that legal? No." No need to worry about intent for that charge. Establishing that charge, however, could then bolster a broader case of stalking, by showing the defendant has broken the law regarding misuse of tracking devices, contributing to a larger pattern of illegal behavior of the defendant towards the victim.
So maybe this isn't so pointless, after all.
A warrant/probable cause is already an exception to virtually every such restriction.
Alcohol prohibition also worked so well...
You want it secure then try only registered and paired devices to be responded to and for anything else lack of or false signals. Otherwise, criminals do not care what law they break.
What is wrong with warrant driven exception for LE?
You know some people thought it is okay for red flag laws that LE officers could kick doors without warrant and search for firearms. Unfortunately, for "innovators" of this idea which they do not know there is so called "castle doctrine" in vast majority even liberal states that authorizes dweller to open fire in cases like this even if on other side are police officers and act as if it was attack by criminals. We had that case even here in New Jersey and judge ruled there was no guilt on any side and nobody get any punishment, but police could be more careful. Hence, no smart LEO tries to kick doors but rather asks for warrant first regardless of red flag laws to prevent situation of potential death on one side or the other with no other consequences. In country that is built on firearm possession from day one of its existence, foreign laws do not apply and it will not change (I had discussion with foreign LEO's and they sound clueless applying their laws in different part of world thinking it is smart or reasonable - it is not).