Time to get rid of the Monarchy?

[Kupe Navigator]

We have pubs older than the US. That's History and Culture.

So does Ireland. Let me reword: what does Britain have that both Ireland and US or any other English speaking nation dosen't?
And pubs... ha ha very impressive.

 

[Samson]

And Andrew is just a person. Honestly even if there was no monarchy there will be people like Miller and Andrew.

He is a person who raped someone because he thought he could get away with it, and has "got away with it" with the help of the UK state. This happened because (in part) we have a monarchy ruling us.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

He is a person who raped someone because he thought he could get away with it, and has "got away with it" with the help of the UK state. This happened because (in part) we have a monarchy ruling us.

So did Erza Miller. And US have no royalty.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

So does Ireland. Let me reword: what does Britain have that both Ireland and US or any other English speaking nation dosen't?
And pubs... ha ha very impressive.

Why does having a English speaking Royal Family matter? There are plenty of royal families that speak English.

So did Erza Miller. And US have no royalty.

Nonsense false equivalency. No one is saying only royals are rapists, or that rape only occurs with royals.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Why does having a English speaking Royal Family matter? There are plenty of royal families that speak English.

I meant English speaking NATION.

Nonsense false equivalency. No one is saying only royals are rapists, or that rape only occurs with royals.

I meant Erza Miller committed his crime thinking he could get away with it like Andrew... and he ain't no royal.

 

[Gorbles]

Yes prince Andrew will possibly be arrested... but what will stop the second andrew from appearing?

So your argument here is "we shouldn't arrest paedophiles because there will always be more paedophiles"? That's the winning argument you're going with, here?

 

[Kupe Navigator]

So your argument here is "we shouldn't arrest paedophiles because there will always be more paedophiles"? That's the winning argument you're going with, here?

No my argument is that it is delusional to think ending monarchy will end cases like Andrew when Erza Miller proved that right words in social media and connections can avoid a jail sentence.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

No my argument is that it is delusional to think ending monarchy will end cases like Andrew when Erza Miller proved that right words in social media and connections can avoid a jail sentence.

Yes, only you are suggesting such a delusion.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Yes, only you are suggesting such a delusion.

And do you think ending monarchy would prevent Erza Miller?

 

[AmazonQueen]

Honestly without royalty Britain will be just smaller poorer and weaker US without guns and burgers.

Well thats two ways we would be better. Sadly we have burgers and a few guns.

 

[Samson]

The question was if it may prevent Andy II.

 

[Gorbles]

And do you think ending monarchy would prevent Erza Miller?

Nobody said it would. You're the one who raised Miller as a textbook case of whataboutism.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Nobody said it would. You're the one who raised Miller as a textbook case of whataboutism.

And I am saying ending monarchy will not change a thing. People already know they will be caught if they commit crime.. except those with connections like Andrew and Miller.

 

[Gorbles]

And I am saying ending monarchy will not change a thing. People already know they will be caught if they commit crime.. except those with connections like Andrew and Miller.

So you're saying that removing the protection that people like Prince Andrew currently enjoy . . . wouldn't remove the protection that Prince Andrew currently enjoys?

Are you sure you've thought this through?

 

[Kupe Navigator]

So you're saying that removing the protection that people like Prince Andrew currently enjoy . . . wouldn't remove the protection that Prince Andrew currently enjoys?

Are you sure you've thought this through?

Yes because royalty isn't only thing that people like Andrew can use to protect himself from- like Miller he could use key words in social media or have connections with right group that could prevent him from jail time.
After all Miller doesn't have wealth of royalty or status of royalty and yet he isn't in jail is he?

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

I meant English speaking NATION.

Seems arbitrary. What's wrong with Spanish or Urdu?

 

[sherbz]

I am not sure i completely agree with assertion that Andrew "got away with it". It seems to suggest he got away scot free. Sure - he did not have to go to court and testify. But even if he did, isnt it the case that 90% of those types of civil claims are settled out of court anyway? And would he not have possibly even paid less had he gone through the rigmarole of the court process. Im not sure it was ever likely he would have been prosecuted and sentenced. It was more a case that Charles could not allow his brother to testify in court because he would embarrass the Royal family when it was the queens jubillee. So he agreed to pay an over inflated sum to Virginia Giruffe in order to get her to drop it. So did he get away with it? Im not sure he did. He completely disgraced himself. Lost a lot of privileges he used to enjoy in the UK and paid out a lot of money. Whereas if he had gone to court the exact same things would have happened, only he would not have had to testify and he would probably have paid out quite a bit less than he did. The main thing i wonder is if he was prevented from testifying due to possible criminal proceedings in future. I am not sure we have heard the last of it at any rate.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Seems arbitrary. What's wrong with Spanish or Urdu?

Because I want to compare Britain?

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

And do you think ending monarchy would prevent Erza Miller?

No, only you are suggesting such a delusion.

 

[Samson]

I am not sure i completely agree with assertion that Andrew "got away with it". It seems to suggest he got away scot free. Sure - he did not have to go to court and testify. But even if he did, isnt it the case that 90% of those types of civil claims are settled out of court anyway? And would he not have possibly even paid less had he gone through the rigmarole of the court process. Im not sure it was ever likely he would have been prosecuted and sentenced. It was more a case that Charles could not allow his brother to testify in court because he would embarrass the Royal family when it was the queens jubillee. So he agreed to pay an over inflated sum to Virginia Giruffe in order to get her to drop it. So did he get away with it? Im not sure he did. He completely disgraced himself. Lost a lot of privileges he used to enjoy in the UK and paid out a lot of money. Whereas if he had gone to court the exact same things would have happened, only he would not have had to testify and he would probably have paid out quite a bit less than he did. The main thing i wonder is if he was prevented from testifying due to possible criminal proceedings in future. I am not sure we have heard the last of it at any rate.

If I did what he did and did not end up doing porridge I would consider that "getting away with it".