Laws on Nudity

The laws on nudity in public are too ambiguous and open to personal interpretation by local magistrates. It should be clear and unambiguous – either it is an offence to be naked in public or it is not. Proof of intent is virtually impossible to prove or disprove.

Why is this idea important?

The laws on nudity in public are too ambiguous and open to personal interpretation by local magistrates. It should be clear and unambiguous – either it is an offence to be naked in public or it is not. Proof of intent is virtually impossible to prove or disprove.

Allow Public Nudity (continuation)

To REPEAL all legislation hindering one's civil right to wear whatever one wants to wear (or not) in public (including libraries and other buildings deemed to be 'public')*.

* While total freedom should be a right, there needs to be legislation to 'deal with' 'suspicious clothing' e.g. full motorcycle helmet without a motorcycle, hoodies, other identity-concealing clothing for the intent or purpose to deceive; or worn for the purpose of hiding oneself or property likely to be used for a criminal act.

Why is this idea important?

To REPEAL all legislation hindering one's civil right to wear whatever one wants to wear (or not) in public (including libraries and other buildings deemed to be 'public')*.

* While total freedom should be a right, there needs to be legislation to 'deal with' 'suspicious clothing' e.g. full motorcycle helmet without a motorcycle, hoodies, other identity-concealing clothing for the intent or purpose to deceive; or worn for the purpose of hiding oneself or property likely to be used for a criminal act.

Repeal and remove any legal barrier to nudity

Nudity is not in itself a crime, however the police use and enforce a number of other laws to prevent people from being nude. This can be anything, i.e. 'causing a breach of the peace' or 'intentionally causing sexual offence or distress' amongst others. Why should I risk prosecution for collecting my mail or my milk from my doorstep if I am nude at the time.Why should I risk prosecution because my neighbour sees me nude in my garden whilst he is up his apple tree whilst collecting apples or even just looking out of their windows. People should not face any prosecution  for nudity, anywhere. It should not automatically be assumed that a naked person is out to cause any alarm, distress or that they are about to commit a sexual crime. People should be free to dress or not as they please.

Why is this idea important?

Nudity is not in itself a crime, however the police use and enforce a number of other laws to prevent people from being nude. This can be anything, i.e. 'causing a breach of the peace' or 'intentionally causing sexual offence or distress' amongst others. Why should I risk prosecution for collecting my mail or my milk from my doorstep if I am nude at the time.Why should I risk prosecution because my neighbour sees me nude in my garden whilst he is up his apple tree whilst collecting apples or even just looking out of their windows. People should not face any prosecution  for nudity, anywhere. It should not automatically be assumed that a naked person is out to cause any alarm, distress or that they are about to commit a sexual crime. People should be free to dress or not as they please.

The freedom to be naked in public places

Being naked in itself does not harm anyone, except potentially the naked person.

However great harm is caused to many people because they have issues with their bodies, or with the naked bodies of other people.

 

Why is this idea important?

Being naked in itself does not harm anyone, except potentially the naked person.

However great harm is caused to many people because they have issues with their bodies, or with the naked bodies of other people.

 

Eliminate laws regulating and requiring clothing

The government has no business regulating what clothing a person must wear of chooses to wear or not to wear.  Requiring clothing forces everyone to buy from textile merchants, and restricts the freedom of individuals who may choose not to purchase and wear uncomfortable clothing or shoes.

Human bodies are not "obscene" or "indecent."  Human bodies are not "dirty" any more than the shirt you didn't wash yesterday. Human feet are not any more dirty than the shoes you never wash.  Fresh air and sunshine are healthful and natural in pleasant weather.  Lets get the government off the back of the people and repeal laws that require and regulate clothing.  Its really none of their business.

Why is this idea important?

The government has no business regulating what clothing a person must wear of chooses to wear or not to wear.  Requiring clothing forces everyone to buy from textile merchants, and restricts the freedom of individuals who may choose not to purchase and wear uncomfortable clothing or shoes.

Human bodies are not "obscene" or "indecent."  Human bodies are not "dirty" any more than the shirt you didn't wash yesterday. Human feet are not any more dirty than the shoes you never wash.  Fresh air and sunshine are healthful and natural in pleasant weather.  Lets get the government off the back of the people and repeal laws that require and regulate clothing.  Its really none of their business.

Public Nudity

The Sexual Offences Act (2003) states that exposure (and hence public nudity) is only a crime if a person's genitals are exposed and they intend for someone to see them and to be caused alarm and distress.

This means that nudists, skinny dippers or nude sunbathers etc. are not breaking the law, as someone has to intend to cause alarm and distress for it to be a crime (and so someone being alarmed or distressed without intent is not a crime).  This is good.

However, someone can still be arrested for public nudity under the common law of breaching the peace.  In order to clarify the situation and futher protect nudists I think that this law should be ammended so that it specifically states that

1) Nudity, by itself, cannot be considered a breach of the peace

2) A person can be arrested for nudity only if there is a serious reason to believe that they intend to cause alarm and distress.

Why is this idea important?

The Sexual Offences Act (2003) states that exposure (and hence public nudity) is only a crime if a person's genitals are exposed and they intend for someone to see them and to be caused alarm and distress.

This means that nudists, skinny dippers or nude sunbathers etc. are not breaking the law, as someone has to intend to cause alarm and distress for it to be a crime (and so someone being alarmed or distressed without intent is not a crime).  This is good.

However, someone can still be arrested for public nudity under the common law of breaching the peace.  In order to clarify the situation and futher protect nudists I think that this law should be ammended so that it specifically states that

1) Nudity, by itself, cannot be considered a breach of the peace

2) A person can be arrested for nudity only if there is a serious reason to believe that they intend to cause alarm and distress.