British police say nude hiking is legal

[John P]

Someone met a naked hiker and called the police. The police said there was no need for any action.

https://eastdevonnews.co.uk/2020/05/28/naked-rambler-on-coastal-path-near-sidmouth-prompts-call-to-police/

I'm a bit puzzled why they called the guy a "naturist behaving passively" when he was out walking, but that doesn't affect anything.

[ric]

i guess its police speak to differentiate between a naturist and a flasher and between passive and aggressive .   aggressive flasher theyed have to respond.  its also a clear simple understandable phrase to give to the public.

[Greenbare Woods]

Nudists out behaving passively promote public awareness of nudity as an acceptable choice of cover or not.   News stories such as this educate the public that nudity is not a crime.  Women who see someone naked and call the police learn that no law is being violated.  Police get practice informing the public.  Its a good outcome all around. 

We nudists, wherever we are, need to get out and be seen by more people until seeing naked ramblers is a common experience for the general public, and police get tired of wasting time talking to those who can't mind their own business. 

A century ago 1922, women were arrested in Chicago for wearing swimming suits that did not cover their legs.  They got the law changed because they were brave enough to challenge the law even when they got arrested.  That kind of challenge to "indecent exposure" law needs to happen today in Chicago and other places.  We can only make changes if we are brave enough to confront tyranny.

[Davie]

Many laws are the product of a bygone age an reflect the culture that was prevalent at that time. If no-one kicks up a fuss they remain unchanged. The alcohol laws are a similar example that change from time to time as society changes.

I honestly don't think its tyranny although it may be if the law makers don't react to sensible pressure for change from a reasonable number of people. (I have no idea what the tipping point for that is) Some laws are unlikely to fundamentally change, for example the law realting to assault and theft.

Laws that affect social norms will, and a good example are those relating to homosexuality. Its only by promoting our cause and demonstrating naturism is not a threat to anyone that the law and the interpretation of the law will change. Here in the UK we are making progress beyond what we might have expected a few years ago, but there are still challenges. In fact here it was the interpretation rather than the actual law itself.

Davie 

[BlueTrain]

Homosexuality may not be the best example. It is clearly unacceptable to many people in the United States. But if it's legal, they merely tolerate it and put up with it, though not necessarily quietly. And if you're keeping up with the news, there are many things that are tolerated in some places that are unacceptable and probably illegal. Much depends on who you are, more than what you're doing.

[Greenbare Woods]

A century ago they were arresting women in Chicago for not covering their legs. Its all about what you are used to.   People who see nudity will complain at first but will soon get used to it.   Nudists need to be seen often enough for seeing someone naked becomes a common experience. 

[nuduke]

John P,
Thanks for posting this article.  It is actually quite important.  It is a test case of the relatively new CPS guidance which we have all welcomed with open arms, of course.  Great.  The police did exactly what the CPS guidance recommended.  I'm not a member so I don't know if BN know this one and have claimed it as a little victory and thanked the police in their media.  If not someone ought to bring it to their attention.
John

[jbeegoode]

Social media, eh? It was about two weeks a ago on the Wilderness of Rocks trail, when we encountered an unusual number of people.

When we returned, a friend called us and said that a sighting of a couple up there was mentioned on someone's Facebook page. She inquired and the description was a female with zero body fat and male with facial hair. She knew that that was us...small world out on the trail, especially with social media.

We all had a chuckle.
Jbee

[MartinM]

....
I'm a bit puzzled why they called the guy a "naturist behaving passively" when he was out walking, but that doesn't affect anything.

In its ‘Recommended Approach to Naturism’, the CPS guidance says “In the absence of any sexual context and in relation to nudity where the person has no intention to cause alarm or distress it will normally be appropriate to take no action unless members of the public were actually caused harassment, alarm or distress (as opposed to considering the likelihood of this).”

In ref to other potential offences, gross indecency and public nuisance, it says ‘Nudity in public alone with no aggravating features is very unlikely to amount to this (or any other) offence.’

I was trying to find if ‘passive’ is mentioned in either here or in the College of Police guidelines. However, I suspect ‘passive’ has been used by the BN legal team as something of a short hand to cover the lack of ‘intention’ or ‘aggravating factors’ or as the guidance puts it simply ‘going about their business while naked’.

[MartinM]

On re-reading, I see it was the police who used this term, so presumably their shorthand for ‘no aggravating factors’.

I am sure the BN legal team are aware.

There was a rather less helpful article from the Sun the other day, giving police recommendation not to sunbathe in your own garden naked. But a cursory check showed they had just bumped an article from 4 years ago, prior to the new guidance, putting on a new date. But they hadn’t removed a 2016 comment! I remember seeing it at the time.

It is a shame, when the police are mostly following the new guidance (with occasional reminders) that cheap tabloids put back progress with the pubic by putting out misleading information for cheap copy.

[Greenbare Woods]

It is a shame, when the police are mostly following the new guidance (with occasional reminders) that cheap tabloids put back progress with the pubic by putting out misleading information for cheap copy.

Cheap tabloids, and much of the mainstream media are still pushing restrictions on human bodies.  They want naked to be a big news item.