The problem with the bill that I see right now is that it doesn't seem to respect the idea of having the most restrained action possible on a person's rights; it seems to be looking at the larger sense of restraining somebody's actions. I'm thinking about condo associations, for instance. They would have to allow a very large interpretation, as opposed to a restrained interpretation, of violating somebody's rights. So I'm just thinking that this might not be the appropriate formulation for this law.
On October 18th, 2011. See this statement in context.