Scrap Public Order Law Banning Insulting Language, Says David Davis

Posted: Updated: 16/05/2012 07:48

Pa6093161
David Davis has called for the insulting language law to be scrapped

A law banning "insulting" language and behaviour is strangling free speech and should be scrapped,a senior Tory MP has demanded, after a student was held for calling a police officer's horse "gay".

Former shadow home secretary David Davis said Section 5 of the 1986 Public Order Act was having a "terrible, chilling effect on democracy".

Polling suggests almost two-thirds of MPs back Davis, according to a campaign which has brought together religious and secular groups along with human rights and minority organisations.

Under the legislation, the use of "insulting words or behaviour" is outlawed, but opponents say there is too little clarity of what that includes, leading to spurious arrests.

One teenage boy was arrested for holding a "Scientology is a dangerous cult" placard and a student was held for telling a police officer his horse was "gay", they said.

While it was right to protect people against unjust discrimination and the incitement of violence against them, the campaign said, insulting behaviour was open to too much interpretation.

The campaign is using the slogan "Feel free to insult me".

Davis said repeal was "vital to protecting freedom of expression in Britain today".

"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."

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.

Only 17% thought repeal would undermine the ability of the police to protect the public and one in five believed it would penalise minorities.

The campaign has secured a rare alliance of secularist and Christian groups.

Keith Porteous Wood, of the National Secular Society, said: "Free speech is not free if it is available only to some and not others.

"Secularists, in defending free expression, must ensure that the law is fair to everybody and argue equally for the right of religious and non-religious people to freely criticise and exchange opinions without fear of the law - unless they are inciting violence."

The Christian Institute's Simon Calvert said: "Churches around the world find themselves in constant friction with aspects of the cultures in which they live. So free speech is vital to us all.

"Britain's historic civil liberties were often hammered out amidst controversy over freedom to preach without state interference. Christians know first hand why free speech is precious and this is why the Christian Institute is pleased to join people across the political and philosophical spectrum to help bring about this simple but important change."

Other groups signed up to the campaign include Big Brother Watch, the Freedom Association and gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, who has himself been arrested under Section 5.
Tatchell said: "The open exchange of ideas - including unpalatable, even offensive, ideas - is a hallmark of a free and democratic society."

ComRes surveyed 154 MPs between February 14 and March 14 by self-completion postal or online questionnaire. Data were weighted to reflect the composition of the House of Commons.

FOLLOW UK POLITICS

A law banning "insulting" language and behaviour is strangling free speech and should be scrapped,a senior Tory MP has demanded, after a student was held for calling a police officer's horse "gay". ...
A law banning "insulting" language and behaviour is strangling free speech and should be scrapped,a senior Tory MP has demanded, after a student was held for calling a police officer's horse "gay". ...
Filed by Lucy Sherriff  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 31
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
04:26 PM on 05/17/2012
There is a legal maxim that "mere abuse is not slander". Absolutely ridiculuos that it can be a criminal offence.
08:02 PM on 05/16/2012
Typical of the police, always looking for the soft option, but cannot and will not do the job they are paid for.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Zurichilux
A liberal conservative controversialist
04:03 PM on 05/16/2012
I read this originally as a law which they were trying to bring in, not one which already exists! I cannot believe this type of big-brother state offence even exists Its an abhorrent intrusion on free speech.
02:40 PM on 05/16/2012
I agree in theory but disagree in principle.

The current laws are ridiculously over-the-top, but the problem is that without them it could open the door for much worse.

Personally I don't believe in freedom of speech. I think that history shows quite clearly that when people have true freedom of speech the first thing they do is insult, demean and bully other people. Just look at the internet. People are dumb dangerous animals and we need laws in place to keep people acting civil to each other. Those laws shouldn't be so over-the-top that an everyday insult is punished severely, but there is a line between off-hand insults and persecution, and we have to be vigilant of it.
03:08 PM on 05/16/2012
Simple answer ton that, if you are so concerned about the Internet being used in the manner you describe, don't go on it.

Would you take you wife and daughter on a walk around an area that has a reputation for muggings and slobbish behaviour?

The same applies to web sites, if they offend, don't attend.
photo
25sammy25
We just wanna be togever !!!!
08:40 PM on 05/16/2012
Well said. Sensible and civil answer without insulting.
photo
25sammy25
We just wanna be togever !!!!
08:39 PM on 05/16/2012
For not believing in freedom of speech you seem to have a lot to say. Freedom of speech does not always mean to be insultive but giving an opinion which we are all entitled to do.
01:03 PM on 05/16/2012
I cannot believe thatr this guys a Tory! He talks sense and is up front with his views.They picked the wrong leader when they opted for "Davy Boy" On the subject of free speech they arrest a guy for calling a horse "Gay" yet let Muslim radicals should insults and death to our troops and are allowed to do it? Lets get the balance right and use common sense.
01:01 PM on 05/16/2012
There are no offensive words, only offensive sentiment. I can be incredibly offensive without swearing and swear without being offensive.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deluk
disgusted.
12:09 PM on 05/16/2012
I think there should be an exception for the phrase "political correctness" as morons who read the Daily Fail persist in misusing it, along with "heath and safety" and "European Court Of Human Rights"
11:56 AM on 05/16/2012
I tend to agree with DD - a real first!! - on this whole issue. We've become far too 'precious' in the UK in my view. Yes there must always be some restraint exercised by us but... this stiff's gone too far now..
The Act itself and section in question (S5) were passed into law in 1985/6 - do correct me if my date(s) are wrong - following a time of huge social unrest - miners strike etc etc - so its contents are not surprising.
It is though a classic case of the unintended future consequences..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deluk
disgusted.
12:06 PM on 05/16/2012
totally agree, but vulnerable people unable to defend themselves specifically the disabled,still require some form of protection, mustn't throw the baby out with the bathwater!!
01:59 PM on 05/16/2012
Yr point concerning the most vulnerable, is I believe at the very heart this whole issue.. It seems that we're heading towards a point when only those minorities who shout the loudest get heard, the rest, well......................
This comment has been removed.
11:50 AM on 05/16/2012
ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY CORRECT SIR. I might disagree with 99% of what your Party stands for but you have this one spot on and I applaud you for it. Lets drop this politically correct nonsense.
photo
vividrick
I came, I saw...I had a cup of tea!
11:25 AM on 05/16/2012
I'd have arrested the person holding the "Scientology is a dangerous cult" placcard for it's gross spelling error!
11:57 AM on 05/16/2012
Didn't have you down as semantic pedant!! Quite a surprise to me..
photo
vividrick
I came, I saw...I had a cup of tea!
11:23 AM on 05/16/2012
I met Mark Thomas after a show, and he called my local MP at the time a c***. Much hilarity & agreement ensued :-)
northern git
fed up with all the political crap in life
11:27 AM on 05/16/2012
wonder if he learned that from his funk and wagnall
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ben Wilson
Might as well laugh while you still can.
09:59 AM on 05/16/2012
There's an easy line. If some asks not to be insulted, and they haven't purposefully insulted you, and you continue then you get a slap on the wrist. If it's persistant insults it has crossed over into bullying. In an ideal world we'd have an ' it aint what you say its the way that you say it rule, because people are way too into their own interpretations above the speakers intent, But I dont want to image the nightmares that would cause in court, and there in you can see why they opted for politcal correctess banning the use of certain words, it's much easier.
09:54 AM on 05/16/2012
While we're at it, can we get the ban removed on using footage of Parliamentary proceedings for comedic or satirical purposes?

It's a ridiculous protection and the news media makes them look just as ridiculous as any comedian could.
09:30 AM on 05/16/2012
you mean it will soon be legal to call the conservatives a bunch of C****s?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jacksdad41
Quant Je Puis
10:26 AM on 05/16/2012
Surprisingly @andy, Peter Tatchell was on radio 4 this morning asking for exactly the same thing - he had canvassed a significant number of MP's who were all in agreement that the word "insulting" should be dropped for the legislation. He even went so far as to say that some of the language used by homophobes against the LBGTQ community should be regarded as fair game was equally surprising - it was intersting listening to someone who I dont personally have a great deal of time for asking for such libertarian "rights", as he rightly point out it is covered by section 4a or section 5 of the public order act.
northern git
fed up with all the political crap in life
09:25 AM on 05/16/2012
to DD I say B*******

throw away laws against bad language and you throw away repect completely

bad language is not pleasant, offensive, disrespectful and throwing this law away signals the demise of respect and above all not necessary

I rarely swear or am disrespectful I don't need to be!

but in this case DD deserves the above expletive.

silly man