SF Anti-Nudity Law
As I understand it, SF passed an anti-nudity law in the 90s. However, I also believe that the police will not bother someone who is nude unless they are causing some sort of problem -- that nudity remains a non-issue unless there's some other problem.
Anyone know about this for certain?
As I understand it, the current "anti-nudity" law was put in place because when it was legal to be naked people basically abused the right with behavior that wasn't appreciated like sitting on public seats without any barriers (e.g.; towels).
My personal view of nudism is that it should be practiced where it's legally and socially acceptable to be naked.
So I strongly ask that even if it is possible to get away with breaking the law and go naked it public that people not do so and risk even greater restrictions and enforcement of being naked.
The law, passed in 2012 not "the 90's", does not permit public nudity without a permit (which is how events like Folsom Street Fair allow public nudity). While I'm sure you can find some people's opinions about how and why it was enacted, a simple Google search will return various articles with the facts.
None the less, it's no longer legal to be naked in public in San Francisco except as noted above.
In the 90s is when the first anti-nudity law was enacted -- in San Francisco -- and it was largely ignored.
The first anti-nudity law is Berkeley was enacted in the 80s. Which seems very odd that Berkeley did it first -- theirs was in response to, "Naked Man," who was attending UC Berkeley in the nude.
The law in the 90s (in San Francisco) was not in response to abuses. Up to that point, nudity was reasonably socially acceptable -- and even after that because the general population didn't care and the police knew they had better things to do that bother people who were not causing any problems.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!