UK: Ring of Steel to protect Royal Wedding

Topics that do not fit anywhere else. Absolutely NO discussions of religion, race, or immigration!

Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1

Post Reply

Topic author
philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 6966
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

UK: Ring of Steel to protect Royal Wedding

#1

Post by philip964 » Sun May 20, 2018 4:24 pm

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/ce ... 017c9e3def

My wife is looking at the coach and the beautiful bride and groom, I am noticing the police and swat officers at about 10 feet apart with automatic assault rifles at attention with the rifles held vertically in front of them. They were on both sides of the roadway, dressed in black motionless. The crowd was two security fences from the officers. The officers we staring straight at the crowd. If you were not paying attention, you hardly noticed them.

So its an island nation. Guns are illegal. Most of the police do not carry guns. Yet for this wedding not only is it held is some little town miles from London, there are thousands of police with automatic assault rifles guarding what is most likely England's favorite couple.

So if you outlaw guns, doesn't that solve the problem, no guns, no worries, no crime.

Were they worried about a knifing, a glassing?

No doubt every car that came into the ring of steel was searched. Most likely no backpacks or long coats were allowed either. I'm sure each guest, visitor or just a person in the crowd was passed through a metal detector.

Why? Guns are illegal in the UK.


MaduroBU
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 347
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 9:11 am

Re: UK: Ring of Steel to protect Royal Wedding

#2

Post by MaduroBU » Sun May 20, 2018 4:54 pm

Only the royals have the right to state protection with guns. Subjects do not.

The practical difference between a republic and an oligarchy is the presence of effective weapons in the hands of the citizens. In a republic, the state excercises a limited monopoly on the use of force; in an oligarchy the state exercises an absolute monopoly on the use of force.

User avatar

AndyC
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 10020
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 12:34 pm
Location: Richardson, TX

Re: UK: Ring of Steel to protect Royal Wedding

#3

Post by AndyC » Sun May 20, 2018 7:58 pm

High-value target; of course they're protected.
Remember Kitty Genovese

Image

Amateurs skip safety-checks - pros don't.
Preferred Travel Agent - 72 Virgins Dating Club
There's nothing quite like the offer of 230 grains to a man's chest to remind him of his manners

User avatar

Paladin
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:02 pm
Location: DFW

Re: UK: Ring of Steel to protect Royal Wedding

#4

Post by Paladin » Mon May 21, 2018 8:35 am

MaduroBU wrote:Only the royals have the right to state protection with guns. Subjects do not.

The practical difference between a republic and an oligarchy is the presence of effective weapons in the hands of the citizens. In a republic, the state excercises a limited monopoly on the use of force; in an oligarchy the state exercises an absolute monopoly on the use of force.
This!

It is amazing that the gun grabbers claim these weapons are not appropriate for self defense, but the British Royals have scores of guards there in plain view with AR-15s and fully-automatic weapons.
NRA Endowment, TSRA Life, GOA Life Member
Texas State Guard

Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”