These sections of law make it illegal to use "threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour" that intentionally or are likely to cause "harassment, alarm or distress".

They should be removed completely, or changed to make them less vague and to ensure that they do not obstruct free speech. In particular "insulting" is far too weak a condition, as is the concept of causing "harassment, alarm or distress".

Why the contribution is important

This law is far too vague and damaging to free speech. It allows simple disputes to escalate into the legal process resulting in people getting criminal records for getting into an argument.

A recent example of the problems it caused: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7862137/Was-it-necessary-to-turn-an-insult-involving-coconuts-into-a-criminal-prosecution.html

Current rating

4.2
Average score : 4.2
Based on : 25 votes
DoktorbUK
Posted by DoktorbUK July 01, 2010 at 08:18
This recommendation is highly commendable. "Insulting" can mean pretty much anything, in any context, and can be used by people for the wrong reasons. This legislation requires repealing to return the right to speak freely to people.

Please login to flag this comment as inappropriate

Fencer90
Posted by Fencer90 July 01, 2010 at 08:19
Excellent Idea

Please login to flag this comment as inappropriate

dazchloe
Posted by dazchloe July 01, 2010 at 08:29
DoktorbUK i agree we need freedom of speach

Please login to flag this comment as inappropriate

Youngy88
Posted by Youngy88 July 01, 2010 at 08:31
In the example you have given, Ms Brown made a racist comment and should have been punished. If the Council had any gumption they would have suspended her for a peiod of time and that would be the end of it. Unfortunately they tried to sweep it under the carpet and it escalated out of hand. I think the act needs to be changed rather than repealed so that some leeway is added allowing for common sense to be applied in instances such as this

Please login to flag this comment as inappropriate

viz1
Posted by viz1 July 01, 2010 at 08:35
we need freedom of speech.

Please login to flag this comment as inappropriate

Jonathan
Posted by Jonathan July 01, 2010 at 08:48
This is so important.

The current wording gives the police carte blanche to arrest anyone for saying anything inflammatory. No one can speak their mind on controversial issues without fear of being arrested under the Public Order Act.

If this government is at all serious about protecting free speech, it has to change the wording of these sections.

Please login to flag this comment as inappropriate

Winchester
Posted by Winchester July 05, 2010 at 10:29
Why carnt you tell people who are at best trespassing to get off private property i was arrested for doing just that, Dispite ther being an investigation on going into horse attacks in the area signs errected saying private property and we had horses right next to the lane where these alledged offences occoured its no different to you finding someone in your back garden

Please login to flag this comment as inappropriate

Please log in to add comments and rate ideas