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.
The legislative law is very clear that nudity and nudism are not crimes. However, common law contradicts this by allowing the arrest of nudists for breaching the peace – even if there is no intent to cause alarm and distress, or even if there is no harm, alarm and distress caused in the first place.
It is essential in modern Britain that the rights of minorities are protected. Nudists are still in an unclear legal position. A nude walker or skinny dipper (even in a remote area) still has to be aware of the possibility of being arrested, even if they are causing no harm at all. This is clearly wrong, and it should be recognised that nudity, by itself, should never be considered a crime.
While I realise that being naked in the wrong place at the wrong time could be offensive to some, in the recent hot spell my clothes were wet through, I was uncomfortable and overheating.
I would have loved to strip off and sit in my porch unhindered to cool off but had to suffer for fear of being reported by neighbours.
So I had to stew for hours for fear of prosecution.
I feel that being lumped in with “flashers” for wanting to cool off is just another example of how restrictive and confusing British law can be.
We need the law changing to clarify precisely what is legal (e.g., nudity on own residential land) and not (e.g., parks, public beaches, common land etc)
Unfortunately, like so much of British law, it’s too open to interpretation with the result that one bobby might knock on my door and another might not.
Silly.
I would like to be able to go nude in secluded public places without the fear of ending up in court.Since the law clearly states that this is legal I feel that all that is needed is for central government to issue some basic guidelines to the police to avoid this situation arising.For example on a persons own property,on public beaches and adjacent areas and maybe public footpaths.
Face it, nusists ARE pervets. A large majority of them are also paedophiles using the cover of nudism/naturism to see naked kids. Before you come back with all the crap about this is not true and I should research the subject. I have researched it. And you both know deep down what I say is true even though you will never admit and come back with some other bull crap. The FACT is you two are dirty pervets whether you like it or not. To say otherwise would be a lie.
Okay, although ‘some’ people may use the term nudist to be able to see others naked (which I agree is wrong and not the purpose of nudism) I find it highly offensive that you would come onto the internet and call all nudists perverts! I am not going to tell you that it isn’t true and that you need to research it as I’m sure there are statistics somewhere to argue your case! But don’t come on here calling all nudists perverts as there are many that aren’t and enjoy the freedom that nudism provides!
Thanks