Kate D

I vehemently oppose considering age verification as outlined in this bill a useful tool to keep children safe: it is NOT the same as walking into an adult venue and presenting an ID to prove individual ability to remain in the space. I have read already from studies and articles that well-intended policing legislation such as SB648 instead leads to dangerous outcomes the send folks to lesser-known or less-monitored websites, creates a gross demand for pirated intimate material; and have seen minors use a parent’s ID anyway, since a computer program cannot be a bouncer at a club (who is looking at the person holding the ID and knows they are underage and attempting to use a fake). There are larger privacy and data risks involved for the general public, not only folks who search pornographic material, and I see this legislation questions the right to free expression which is thoroughly misaligned with New Hampshire’s insistence to ‘Live Free…’ It is the duty of a parent or guardian to keep their child safe while navigating the internet. There is no legislation that can directly replace the time and care needed to teach media literacy and online safety to our youth. There are tools on cell phones and computer devices (akin to child locks) that can and should be used in these instances, rather than passing bills that affect the public as a whole for an issue that is specific. I urge the committee to reject SB648.