The bill aims to make it a class C felony to weaponize an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). Additionally, it would make the use of drones to control explosives or deadly weapons, or to release tear gas or other substances, punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
Haughwout testified that the bill is pointless, as it is aimed at combating a problem that does not exist.
"This is a bill, a bill giving a solution to a problem that simply doesn't exist, it's in search of a problem," Haughwout testified. "It's already illegal to assault, it's already illegal to murder, it's already illegal to recklessly endanger the public."
On Tuesday, the drone debate continued, with a bill to support police use of drones for emergency situations. Police argued that armed drones could be an effective weapon for law enforcement to insure public safety.
"We've had a report that somebody's going to fly a drone into an airplane, into an engine, or it's a weaponized drone," Farmington Police Chief Paul Melanson said. "We're concerned and we don't have those answers yet."
The ACLU testified that allowing law enforcement the use of armed drones opens the door for more police abuse. The organization supports Monday’s bill to keep armed drones out of the hands of the public.
"We are concerned that there could be misuse, particularly on vulnerable communities," David McGuire of the ACLU said at Tuesday’s law enforcement hearing, the local Fox affiliate reported.
