Dear British people, wake up!

reply to post by Soloprotocol


But with more expensive fish n chips than blackpool!

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


When it came to the Romans, I'd agree 100%. That's the reason why the English empire rose from the ashes of the Roman... even if it took a Norman bastard to set the wheels in motion.

I just want to be clear here, there really is no answer on how to stop it then? Really, you're just in the same boat as we are here in the states... aside from the fact that we're still armed. You may have beheaded a King, we put one in the looney bin

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
Because they have no power. Power in the UK goes through Parliament - they write the laws, they pass the laws, they run the Government. The Monarchy does not have its hands on the keys to power any more - they haven't for some time. The PM goes to see the Queen once a week to tell her how things are going to happen, not the other way around. There is no mechanism at all to allow a monarch to take power. It cannot happen. The Civil Service takes it orders from Parliament. Hell, even the House of Lords has next to no power - they haven't even been able to vote on budgets since 1910.

OOOoooohhh...you're gonna get a touch of disagreement with me there...the Permanent Civil Service have a degree of power that transcends Parliament...not overly tangible...but they kind of shape the way the box is constructed even if they cannot entirely control how it is filled.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


You're not getting it are you? That wasn't the question asked.

The question was, what happens when a King decides "to hell with law" and wants his true crown back? Who stops him?

reply to post by Heisenberg59


nope, the question is how the ruddy heck would that be possible, a monarch can declare what they like, it doesn't mean diddly squat though

Originally posted by Heisenberg59
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

You're not getting it are you? That wasn't the question asked.

The question was, what happens when a King decides "to hell with law" and wants his true crown back? Who stops him?

The PM. And Parliament. And the Law Lords. And the Police. And the Armed Services. And the public. It's not going to happen.

reply to post by Heisenberg59


Do you really, really honestly believe that the UK will pull out of the EU .... even though the majority of Brits may want that -
No No No ----- it's all a ploy to get our own way with the EU ......... Quite clever really but then we always have been ...... you didn't see us change our currency did you?

Originally posted by Heisenberg59

Originally posted by Soloprotocol

Originally posted by Heisenberg59
reply to post by ObservingYou

 

what happens if Charles takes the crown? The man everyone thinks to be a loon? What happens if decrees himself supreme ruler?

He'll get a good kick in the China Dolls and told to behave himself.....

From who? The UK is disarmed. Who is going to tell him to behave himself?

If the crown ever does decide to use their riches and hire a force to subjugate the good peoples of England, there would be not much they could do about it, immediately anyway.
If the UN or NATO rolled up onto an American beach however, the Americans could muster quite an army of civilians to push them back into the water.
I wish the Brits would have kept their guns.
But on the brighter side, I'm sure there are still some IRA types who can train the people how to defeat a superior military!
This is the thing, guns not only protect the homeowner, store owner, lone lady on a warm summers night in a park, but the also protect their community against enemies that may be foreign or domestic.
Anti-gunners look down their noses at us gun owning barbarians yet as soon as something threatens them, they scream for the protection of armed men.
Before it was guns it was swords, well I do have good news!
Lasers are the new trend and guess what, they can burn through walls and schools and malls and....
Better invest in a good quality mirror suit I guess.

Originally posted by skalla
reply to post by Heisenberg59

 

nope, the question is how the ruddy heck would that be possible, a monarch can declare what they like, it doesn't mean diddly squat though

How is it not possible? Some arrogant King comes to the throne and decides he wants what he think he's deserved. You don't think there would be people in the UK that agree? You can't just keep a lion in a zoo and expect it not to get hungry. Meaning this royalty you have for show is eventually going to bite the hand that feeds.

I've got to say it. The UK has a long history, longer than our own.

They know how to handle themselves and will weather through whatever changes occur, when there is a change on the stage. Have been doing so millennium, compared to our centuries. I don't worry about the UK, I worry about the USA. We are the ones who feel we need to police everyone else and have a position to do so. Which is ludicrous. We're a baby in the water, with to much self-love to take acceptance of our own crap - so we worry about some others countries crap!

Eh, politics. I'm horrible with them.

Originally posted by Heisenberg59
reply to post by KilgoreTrout

 

When it came to the Romans, I'd agree 100%. That's the reason why the English empire rose from the ashes of the Roman... even if it took a Norman bastard to set the wheels in motion.

I just want to be clear here, there really is no answer on how to stop it then? Really, you're just in the same boat as we are here in the states... aside from the fact that we're still armed. You may have beheaded a King, we put one in the looney bin

To be honest, I think we are in a slightly better place than you are. You still imagine you have freedom and control...and I mean no disrespect by that. We understand the system and it's constraints, realising that the law is our friend if correctly wielded. However, under a such a system there can never be complacency...and this is where we are in danger of failing right now.

reply to post by CirqueDeTruth


And I'd say the Romans had a longer history both as a Republic and an Empire.

Arrogance was their downfall.

That's not even counting the Eastern Roman Empire that also fell to the same arrogance.

Originally posted by Heisenberg59

Originally posted by skalla
reply to post by Heisenberg59

 

nope, the question is how the ruddy heck would that be possible, a monarch can declare what they like, it doesn't mean diddly squat though

How is it not possible? Some arrogant King comes to the throne and decides he wants what he think he's deserved. You don't think there would be people in the UK that agree? You can't just keep a lion in a zoo and expect it not to get hungry. Meaning this royalty you have for show is eventually going to bite the hand that feeds.

the monarchy do not make laws, they sell kiss me quick t-shirts to tourists and fill cheap newspapers with pointless gumph

Originally posted by Heisenberg59

Originally posted by skalla
reply to post by Heisenberg59

 

nope, the question is how the ruddy heck would that be possible, a monarch can declare what they like, it doesn't mean diddly squat though

How is it not possible? Some arrogant King comes to the throne and decides he wants what he think he's deserved. You don't think there would be people in the UK that agree? You can't just keep a lion in a zoo and expect it not to get hungry. Meaning this royalty you have for show is eventually going to bite the hand that feeds.

I don't think you quite understand. The monarchy currently exists on sufference from the people. The Queen has a great deal of influence because she's been on the throne for 60-odd years and has more knowledge of politics and the Constitution (and yes, we do have one) than most people. That said, once she dies the monarchy will take several steps down in influence because everyone hates (or at least curls a lip at) German Charlie. Even if Charlie wanted to take control, there would NOT be any mechanism in place to do so. If he ordered Parliament to be dissolved and the PM didn't want that then he couldn't do it. I doubt that he could even order the changing of the guard to happen ahead of schedule.
The monarchy has no real power. It has influence at the moment, but don't confuse that with power.

reply to post by Heisenberg59


I would like to ask how you think the Monarchy would re-take power?

We have a small armed forces, most of them are posted abroad and austerity cuts are making then smaller as we speak, as they are with our police force. It only takes a few thousand out on the streets here before the law enforcement agencies can no longer control a situation and until they decide they have had enough and go home, the people are in control of the streets.
As for not being armed I can assure you there are plenty of guns in the U.K. both legally and illegally held. In the small city I live in it would only take me a trip to the local drug dealer or back street boozer and I could get myself a firearm. There are many in the U.K. who like having the Monarchy around as they bring in the tourist dollars, but there many who if they decided they were going to retake power by fair means or foul, would not stand for this and short of getting help from a foreign nation any attempt to do so would fail.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


To a certain point, we do still have freedom and control. The problem America has is that it refuses to wake up to the corruption that plague her Government. But really it's been this way since 1913 when the Federal Reserve act passed. John F. Kennedy was our last President. We haven't had once since. Americans refuse to accept reality.

So this thread stays on ATS but the thread talking why Brits don't need guns after customers disarmed a gunman is moved to BTS??

Biased much ATS?

Originally posted by Heisenberg59
reply to post by CirqueDeTruth

 

And I'd say the Romans had a longer history both as a Republic and an Empire.

Arrogance was their downfall.

Not arrogance...don't make that mistake...for a start all things have a natural life cycle...inherited power was the problem in the case of the Romans and most subsequent rulers...and that was how the Romans themselves eclipsed their predecessors. The leadership of Rome was about who you knew, not what you knew...they were further weakened by a lack of cohesion...and faced forces that not only had great physical strength but a solid basis of leadership...natural leadership... This was the downfall of all civilisations until the advent of modern warfare techniques.

reply to post by commencalrider


The point I tried to make here is that keeping royalty around because you like having them is like keeping a lion on a lease in the backyard. He's such a cute little kitty until he bites your arm off.

I think that if the monarchy really wanted it's power back, they have the funds to do so be it through mercenary strength or your own military. And if you can really walk down the street and purchase a firearm in the UK, how has gun control been a success? The criminals are obviously still armed.

Originally posted by Heisenberg59
reply to post by KilgoreTrout

 

To a certain point, we do still have freedom and control. The problem America has is that it refuses to wake up to the corruption that plague her Government. But really it's been this way since 1913 when the Federal Reserve act passed. John F. Kennedy was our last President. We haven't had once since. Americans refuse to accept reality.

Again...don't live on some basis of false idealisim...President Kennedy was not your last President...he was the first of the corrupted, bought leadership. He didn't show gratitude, so he was offed. His Dad bought him the job.