Campaign to revoke UK law that prohibits insults - some of the rudest remarks ever made.

Originally posted by Freeborn
And therein lies one the problems with any police force - they allow their own personal opinions to affect how they deal and handle some situations.

'Who should decide who is insulted? The police? A judge? The truth is that Section 5 is having a terrible, chilling effect on democracy today.'

Ex-Shadow Home secretary Mr Davis said repeal was ''vital to protecting freedom of expression in Britain today''.

A ComRes poll commissioned by the campaign suggested he would have the backing of a clear majority of MPs - with 62% saying it should not be for the state to ban insults.

The Telegraph

No one should be charged for stating something because someone else finds it 'insulting'.

reply to post by ollncasino

The use of the 'reasonable man' test (what is reasonable is decided by a judge or jury) would help to decide whether it is reasonable for a person to have taken offense.

Which is probably why the vast majority of such instances DO NOT go to court - a reasonable person somewhere - be it a police officer, a judge, a magistrate, CPS employee etc - has determined that no offence has taken place.
ETA
But it shouldn't be down to a person's opinion or judgement - it should be clear - black and white - a crime has been committed and this is what is going to happen.
Any law open to interpretation is open to abuse and / or inconsistent application etc.

Why should anyone have to defend themselves, in a very real legal sense, because someone else finds what they said "insulting"?

Because some things are 'insulting'.
Should that be a crime?

Ambiguity has no place in law.
It should be straight forward - a person has done 'something' - that 'something' breaks 'this' law - as a result 'this' is going to happen.

By only highlighting such instances as this it results in people having a completely false and incorrect perception of the UK.
Yes, of course there are issues, and some of those issues require urgent and radical action, but it is NOT all doom and gloom.

I agree entirely with you that this law needs repealing, I just don't think that it's enforced as rigorously or interpreted in the way that is sometimes portrayed.

Originally posted by Freeborn
By only highlighting such instances as this it results in people having a completely false and incorrect perception of the UK.

Yes, of course there are issues, and some of those issues require urgent and radical action, but it is NOT all doom and gloom.

I personally find it disdurbing and worrying that I could be charged and prosecuted (as people have been) for merely stating something that someone else has decided is 'insulting'.

quick point : this law only applies in england & wales

in Scotland "threatening and abusive" behaviour is outlawed by Section 38 of the Criminal Justice and Licencing Act 2010 but insults are not.

so come up north if you want to make a right good insult and avoid prison

reply to post by ollncasino

I personally find it disdurbing and worrying that I could be charged and prosecuted (as people have been) for merely stating something that someone else has decided is 'insulting'.

To an extent I agree, personally I find it an affront and indicative of the repressive direction this country is going.

Yes, we need legislation that deals with hate speech, slander, libel etc but this is far too ambiguous and open to interpretation and at times is enforced more to appease the PC Brigade than to do what is right in accordance with the law etc.

reply to post by yeti101

so come up north if you want to make a right good insult and avoid prison

I do, quite frequently....I tend to find that the vast majority of insults are directed one way - in my direction - but I try my best to give as good as I get and I like to think I hold my own - it all makes for good craic and banter.

Ture democracy at work. Mob rule. The so called "fake" majority taking away the rights of the minority.