Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Law: My Suggestion

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Law: My Suggestion

    In my view - at least as far as the UK is concerned - we should allocate every beach a "designation". All popular beaches that are presently non-naturist should be classified as such and signs should be erected stating that fact along with the penalties for disregarding the clothing requirement rule.

    All other beaches (apart from designated naturist beaches) should be governed by a rule that states that, whilst it is not a naturist beach, nudity is allowed provided it is well out of sight of roads, streets or other premises (e.g. houses, schools, work places etc) AND nobody objects.

    Then, there should be a huge increase in the number of designated naturist beaches, and other segregated (screened and signposted) naturist venues. Central government should require local authorities both in coastal and non-coastal areas to show that facilities exist for naturist practice within, or close to, their areas.

    By adopting the measures I have suggested, no non-naturist would be likely to unintentionally encounter nudity unless momentarily in a remote place and then he or she could require the naked person/people to cover up.

    The legal penalties that can be expected for breaching the rules on nudity ought, generally, to consist of a fine on first conviction followed by imprisonment only for repeat offenders or those who wilfully defy the law.

    This would retain the present default position that public places require that clothing be worn whilst providing far more places in which outdoor nudity can be practiced.

    Stu

  • #2
    In my view - at least as far as the UK is concerned - we should allocate every beach a "designation". All popular beaches that are presently non-naturist should be classified as such and signs should be erected stating that fact along with the penalties for disregarding the clothing requirement rule.

    All other beaches (apart from designated naturist beaches) should be governed by a rule that states that, whilst it is not a naturist beach, nudity is allowed provided it is well out of sight of roads, streets or other premises (e.g. houses, schools, work places etc) AND nobody objects.

    Then, there should be a huge increase in the number of designated naturist beaches, and other segregated (screened and signposted) naturist venues. Central government should require local authorities both in coastal and non-coastal areas to show that facilities exist for naturist practice within, or close to, their areas.

    By adopting the measures I have suggested, no non-naturist would be likely to unintentionally encounter nudity unless momentarily in a remote place and then he or she could require the naked person/people to cover up.

    The legal penalties that can be expected for breaching the rules on nudity ought, generally, to consist of a fine on first conviction followed by imprisonment only for repeat offenders or those who wilfully defy the law.

    This would retain the present default position that public places require that clothing be worn whilst providing far more places in which outdoor nudity can be practiced.

    Stu

    Comment


    • #3
      This seems like progress. However, I disagree witht the prudist's right to demand the nudist cover up. With respect to that issue alone, I also doubt that a law punishing the refusal to cover up would be able to function. Mainly, there is a lack of evidence with which to accuse anyone of not covering up when asked. Local law enforcement would have to be crawling all over the countryside, making sure that if a prudist wanted clothes on ppl that it would happen. It's just not feasable.

      Namedun [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif[/img]

      Comment


      • #4
        "Local law enforcement would have to be crawling all over the countryside, making sure that if a prudist wanted clothes on ppl that it would happen. It's just not feasable."

        There is nothing to stop anyone now inconsiderately stripping off in a remote spot because they know that law enforcement will probably take too long to contact and arrive - BUT - my suggestion at least makes it clear (a) what the law is and (b) that the inappropriately nude person is taking a risk if he or she refuses to cover up.

        Such cases don't just involve the odd ad-hoc nudist having half an hour sunbathe on a really remote spot being seen by some tourist. Bear in mind that the person insisting that they DO cover up could be a police officer themselves (on or off duty), or there may be a whole group of people (e.g. a school party) who are offended by a nudist, or the nude person or people may have been asked before to cover up by users of the beach but stubbornly refuse - perhaps intending to make it an illegal naturist beach against the wishes of the local inhabitants. The police and courts would at least have some powers to act against such irresponsible nuisance nudists.

        Stu

        Comment


        • #5
          So stu, you're proposing a law to correct what? What you are proposing is already in existence. Except for the signs, how does this differ from what is going on now?

          "All other beaches (apart from designated naturist beaches) should be governed by a rule that states that, whilst it is not a naturist beach, nudity is allowed provided it is well out of sight of roads, streets or other premises (e.g. houses, schools, work places etc) AND nobody objects."

          I thought you said that you live on a small island where space was limited. And that poor Joe Smith couldn't even find a hiking trail to go hiking in the nude. Now he is supposed to find a beach that can fit all of your criteria? And again, how does this change things? If nobody objects now, no complaint will be filed and the police will not be called.

          How about this, at certain beaches, signs could be put up that alert people that naked can be found beyond that sign. And you could put it about fifty meters from the official boundary line just to allow for a buffer where you would be hard-pressed to see anyone naked.

          Bob S.

          Comment


          • #6
            Bob,

            There are some slight differences with the present situation PLUS the law would be clearer and everyone would know where they stand.

            "I thought you said that you live on a small island where space was limited. And that poor Joe Smith couldn't even find a hiking trail to go hiking in the nude. Now he is supposed to find a beach that can fit all of your criteria?"

            There is a vast difference between sunbathing on a beach, a static activity whereby you can see people coming from a long way off and have time to cover yourself, and hiking, whereby you are moving along a considerable distance, possibly passing people's homes or work places or roads or railway lines or rivers (with boats on) etc. In the latter case innocent walkers, residents or passengers are at serious risk!

            "And again, how does this change things? If nobody objects now, no complaint will be filed and the police will not be called."

            Firstly people will know that they have a statutory right to object and the nudist willknow they have. Therefore the naturist will probably cover up in the knowledge that if he or she doesn't do so they are infringing the law. If a member of the public has asked the nudist to cover up an dhe does not do so, then an offence will have been committed and the nudist can be arrested and prosecuted without further warning. If, on the other hand, the naturist hasn't been asked to cover up by the member of the public, then the police would have to ask them to do so before any offence is committed. This is currently the law in Denmark.

            "How about this, at certain beaches, signs could be put up that alert people that naked can be found beyond that sign. And you could put it about fifty meters from the official boundary line just to allow for a buffer where you would be hard-pressed to see anyone naked."

            We already have these - it's just that there are far too few of them. And what do you do about the other beaches? e.g. remote beaches, popular non-naturist beaches etc? Do you agree that, if we increase the number of naturist beaches and naturist venues here in the UK tenfold then we should have a stricter and clearer law against other public nudity?

            Stu

            Comment


            • #7
              "There are some slight differences with the present situation PLUS the law would be clearer and everyone would know where they stand."

              What, you have many people not able to understand you law now?

              "Firstly people will know that they have a statutory right to object and the nudist willknow they have."

              So people over there aren't sure what to do when they see a naked person? Are they that startled by the nudity? Do people need to be told what to do in case of seeing a naked person. Do you also propose you put up signs at stores saying that shoplifting is illegal? Maybe you can just provide everyone a layman's guide to British law, explaining their rights and responsibilities as citizens. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img] What you seem to want to do in this law is to create an atmosphere that is hostile to nudists, who neither wants to bother anyone nor be bothered anyway.

              And what if a group of nudists 20 large all gather at a secluded beach that is surrounded by nearly unmolested forest. Along comes a couple who happen upon this very space. Why would this couple have the right to tell twenty people to get dressed. Doesn't the majority have any say in it?

              "Do you agree that, if we increase the number of naturist beaches and naturist venues here in the UK tenfold then we should have a stricter and clearer law against other public nudity?"

              Why should you have a stricter law? According to you, if they use the right law, no one can be naked in public. And how strict do you want it? People already can't go naked. Do you want them to really not go naked? Naturists respect the laws of the land in overwhelming numbers. I would even dare say that most of those who have been arrested for public nudity have not been naturists. So why should we agree to strengthen a law that we already abide by in exchange for more places to go naked? We are the ones who have done most of the compromising. Why can't the non-nudists band over occasionally?

              Bob S.

              Comment


              • #8
                Bob,

                "What, you have many people not able to understand you law now?"

                The law prohibiting nudity isn't very clear over here - in fact - as you argued for a long time - there is no specific law that makes it illegal. Consequently the authorities have to use "outraging public decency" or "insulting behaviour" on (in Scotland) "causing a breach of the peace". My suggestion would make public nudity outside of the circumstances I have proposed explicitly criminal so there should be no further confusion.

                "So people over there aren't sure what to do when they see a naked person?"

                Many people aren't sure exactly what to do - neither are many police officers!

                "Are they that startled by the nudity?"

                Most certainly!

                "Do you also propose you put up signs at stores saying that shoplifting is illegal?"

                No. Because we already have those in many shops, stores and supermarkets in the UK.

                "Maybe you can just provide everyone a layman's guide to British law, explaining their rights and responsibilities as citizens."

                Libraries contain such guides - and even schoolchildren learn this now in special lessons.

                "What you seem to want to do in this law is to create an atmosphere that is hostile to nudists, who neither wants to bother anyone nor be bothered anyway."

                No. I want to create an atmosphere in which nudists can do naturism in places set aside for them. They can also do it in some other places provided no-one objects. But I do want the atmosphere to be VERY hostile to inconsiderate nudists - I want to see them fined and, if they persist, sent to prison. If they truly don't want to bother anyone nor be bothered, they'll stay in naturist areas or be extremely discreet if naked elsewhere.

                "And what if a group of nudists 20 large all gather at a secluded beach that is surrounded by nearly unmolested forest. Along comes a couple who happen upon this very space. Why would this couple have the right to tell twenty people to get dressed. Doesn't the majority have any say in it?"

                The only relevant "majority" is that which refers to the greater part of the national population - not just those who happen to be present. The forest is, if it is a public place, owned by the national population and not, for example, the twenty or so erstwhile members of the Dover Naturist Society. The alternative to that is a sort of mob rule. A clan of aggressive naturists could gather together anywhere and, provided they could show there were more of them present at a given time than textiles, they could get naked just about anywhere. Totally unaceptable!

                "Why should you have a stricter law? According to you, if they use the right law, no one can be naked in public. And how strict do you want it?"

                I want it far clearer, and I want it robustly enforcing, and I want transgressors suitably punished. At the moment I think the law is too vague, the enforcement is patchy and the punishments uncertain.

                "Naturists respect the laws of the land in overwhelming numbers."

                I agree. Such people would have nothing to fear from my proposals.

                "So why should we agree to strengthen a law that we already abide by in exchange for more places to go naked?"

                You said you wanted more places to go naked - i.e. more authorised naturist venues. You said to achieve this you would like to see public nudity effectively decriminalised. I suggested to you that, if you were granted your wish and there was a massive increase in the number of naturist venues, would you drop your demand for the decriminalisation of public nudity. After all, if, as you rightly say, you already abide by the present laws anyway, then you can't lose, can you?

                "We are the ones who have done most of the compromising. Why can't the non-nudists band over occasionally?"

                The compromise I am suggesting is that there is a huge increase in the number of authorised (segregated, screened and signed) naturist venues. That's exactly what you say you want - what better compromise can you possibly ask for?

                There's one thing for sure - no matter how hard you "push the envelope" the majority population in most of the advanced countries of the world aren't going to accept nudity in public places away from designated naturist venues and the showers and changing rooms of fitness and leisure centres etc. But, as you have said many times, that's not what you are asking for anyway.

                Stu

                Comment


                • #9
                  "The law prohibiting nudity isn't very clear over here"

                  If it isn't so clear and people don't know what to do given they see a naked person, then why isn't there more people going naked on the streets? Your systen isn't broken so why fix it?

                  Are they that startled by the nudity? "Most certainly!"

                  What do people do over there when they witness a purse snatcher? Are they so put off by the event that they can't even help out the poor lady? They can't even think straight enough to call the police? If people didn't know to call the police, then wouldn't Steve Gough have been successful? You seem to hold your fellow contrymen in very little regard.

                  "I want to create an atmosphere in which nudists can do naturism in places set aside for them. They can also do it in some other places provided no-one objects."

                  Again, all done with your current law.

                  "But I do want the atmosphere to be VERY hostile to inconsiderate nudists - I want to see them fined and, if they persist, sent to prison."

                  So why is Steve Gough in jail? If your current laws are not sufficient, where does he fit into the whole situation? Was he just a fluke? As you have agreed and we have said, the vast majority of naturists are considerate. We want our own place. Don't blame us.

                  "The forest is, if it is a public place, owned by the national population and not, for example, the twenty or so erstwhile members of the Dover Naturist Society."

                  But this group has travelled far to ge to this secluded area, away from all of your requirements. Now they must forgo their plans because two people don't agree with it? This is one way to make newfound friends and possibly converts. And yes, people who are against it at first can be shown that it is fun and there is nothing to be concerned about.

                  "I want it far clearer, and I want it robustly enforcing, and I want transgressors suitably punished. At the moment I think the law is too vague, the enforcement is patchy and the punishments uncertain."

                  And yet, you do not have a major problem with public nudity, do you?

                  "You said to achieve this you would like to see public nudity effectively decriminalised."

                  I said that it would be one way to achieve it.

                  "I suggested to you that, if you were granted your wish and there was a massive increase in the number of naturist venues, would you drop your demand for the decriminalisation of public nudity."

                  I am not demanding anything. And as you mentioned, my reasoning for relaxing the public nudity laws was to gain more places for nude recreation. So yes, since my goal would be met, my suggestion would not be needed. Of course, I would still be against your more strict version of the law for the reasons that I have already explained.

                  Bob S.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    GRRROOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNN!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      "Your systen isn't broken so why fix it?"

                      It's not broken, just unreliable. Consequenly there are instances of naturists falling foul of the law, and also the police and courts are uncertain of what to do when they encounter antisocial characters such as Messrs Gough and Bethell. My suggestion would make he law crystal clear for everyone's benefit.

                      "What do people do over there when they witness a purse snatcher? Are they so put off by the event that they can't even help out the poor lady? They can't even think straight enough to call the police?"

                      It varies Most people would recognise that a serious crime had been committed. But instances of antisocial or disorderly conduct leave people less certain about how to respond.

                      "If people didn't know to call the police, then wouldn't Steve Gough have been successful? You seem to hold your fellow contrymen in very little regard."

                      Some people who saw him did respond by calling the police. The trouble over here is that people are becoming apathetic about calling the police - even when they suffer a burglary! The police are often found to be extremely slow in responding to calls.

                      I said: "I want to create an atmosphere in which nudists can do naturism in places set aside for them. They can also do it in some other places provided no-one objects."

                      Bob: "Again, all done with your current law."

                      Current law allows authorised naturist places, yes. But there is no law that specifically deals with nudity elsewhere - the rights of neither nudists nor objectors is spelled out.

                      I said: "But I do want the atmosphere to be VERY hostile to inconsiderate nudists - I want to see them fined and, if they persist, sent to prison."

                      Bob: "So why is Steve Gough in jail? If your current laws are not sufficient, where does he fit into the whole situation? Was he just a fluke?"

                      Steve Gough should have been locked up, prosecuted and possibly sent to sent to prison in the south of England, long before he crossed the border into Scotland. The English police weren't sure what to charge him with and so most of the time he was detained using preventive laws such as breach of the peace - which is highly inappropriate. The Public Order Act provides an offence of "insulting or disorderly behaviour" that would suffice, but it is far from ideal in that it does not specify the criminality of public nudity.

                      "We want our own place. Don't blame us."

                      I don't blame considerate naturists. Mr Gough isn't even a naturist, and Mr Bethell's comments suggest that he views naturists with some contempt because they are colluding with the segregationists by using naturist beaches. I do blame a selfish minority of naturists, though, who stray onto textile beaches, just as I blame gawking textiles (usually men) for trespassing onto designated naturist beaches to get their kicks.

                      "But this group has travelled far to ge to this secluded area, away from all of your requirements. Now they must forgo their plans because two people don't agree with it?"

                      Instead of travelling far to get to a secluded non-nudist beach, they could have made their journey to a designated naturist beach. So they took a risk - sometimes risks don't pay off.

                      "This is one way to make newfound friends and possibly converts."

                      Can't they make newfound friends at naturist beaches? And there is no justification in naturists using textile beaches to win converts. That would be like saying it's OK for a Christian to barge into a synagogue and start preaching "to win converts". Unacceptable.

                      "And yes, people who are against it at first can be shown that it is fun and there is nothing to be concerned about.

                      Most people know how to contact a naturist body if they're interested. But most people aren't interested. Consequently their wishes to remain clothed and see only clothed people should be respected. I wouldn't dream of going onto a naturist beach with a megaphone and start shouting about the advantages of wearing swimming costumes. Each to their own. Stop trying to "convert" people who are happy the way they are.

                      "And yet, you do not have a major problem with public nudity, do you?"

                      No. It's a tiny problem. But a problem nontheless and one that can easily be fixed. So we should fix it.

                      "...my reasoning for relaxing the public nudity laws was to gain more places for nude recreation. So yes, since my goal would be met, my suggestion would not be needed."

                      Great. So let's agree on that, then. I don't think you'll ever get a general acceptance or tolerance of public nudity. It's not achievable. So instead you should focus on what can be achieved. What you can do is to step up your campaign for more designated places for naturists - and I've given you lots of suggestions how you could go about that.

                      "Of course, I would still be against your more strict version of the law for the reasons that I have already explained."

                      I thought you would. It's called wanting to have your cake and eat it!

                      Stu

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        MOboy, you messed it up. This was just between stu and me and you had to just interject a comment.

                        "The trouble over here is that people are becoming apathetic about calling the police - even when they suffer a burglary! The police are often found to be extremely slow in responding to calls."

                        OK so here is where you need to start with your own crusade. There seems to be more of a need to get the police department more organized. Maybe hiring more officers, giving them better training, allowing them to gain the public's trust more.

                        "But there is no law that specifically deals with nudity elsewhere - the rights of neither nudists nor objectors is spelled out."

                        So why can't the people who are involved figure it out? Does there need to be a law for everything? I think naked people can coexist with clothed people. It is a way to get others used to the idea of nudity.

                        "Instead of travelling far to get to a secluded non-nudist beach, they could have made their journey to a designated naturist beach. So they took a risk - sometimes risks don't pay off."

                        But there aren't that many nude beaches in England. They found this half and hour walk to be quicker to find somewhere for a nice day of skinny-dipping. Otherwise, they would have had to drive about an hour, depending on traffic, and then had to travel about a half an hour to get to the beach.

                        "And there is no justification in naturists using textile beaches to win converts. That would be like saying it's OK for a Christian to barge into a synagogue and start preaching "to win converts"."

                        I never said that they were going to that beach to "win converts." I said that they went to this rarely used waterspot to go skinny-dipping. They would have preferred to have no one else around, but since said couple came by, why not talk with them and find out more about them, maybe even introducing them to the wonders of swimming naked.

                        "Each to their own. Stop trying to "convert" people who are happy the way they are."

                        This whole argument started in the thread, "Desensitizing the Public" I believe. The whole pretext was to get the public to become more accustomed to nudity. Talking to the public is one way, skinny-dipping in out-of-the way beaches is another (and is the way that all nude beaches have been formed).

                        "I don't think you'll ever get a general acceptance or tolerance of public nudity. It's not achievable."

                        It's an ultimate goal. Our ideal goal. Why not reach as far as we can? In the process, we can consider other goals as steps toward that goal such as gaining more nude beaches.

                        "It's called wanting to have your cake and eat it!"

                        It's called unneccessary laws.

                        Bob S.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          And here I thought this was a public forum. Has something changed?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            quote:
                            Originally posted by shaybare:
                            [qb] And here I thought this was a public forum. Has something changed? [/qb]
                            I think Bob was pulling our legs [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yank, Yank. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

                              And I'm sorry. I forgot about namedun. Hey, I know, how about creating a Bob vs. stu board.

                              Bob S.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X