This article considers the approach of three distinct common law jurisdictions to the problems faced by courts when an individual's right to freedom of expression is invoked as a defence to a low-level public order offence. The contrasting approach of courts in England, Australia and the USA will be examined in order to ascertain whether there is a simple balancing act to be made on a case-by-case basis or whether an optimal model of public order legislation can be established to provide some certainty when rights to freedom of expression collide with the wider rights of the community.