🟢 Must Watch Videos: ▪ 20 Reasons Why King Charles III Will Be a Successful King ➜ czcams.com/video/SzXOTA9mKTY/video.html ▪ 30 Things You Never Knew About King Charles III ➜ czcams.com/video/c1FXIObbyuw/video.html ▪ 30 Royal Rules Broken by Meghan Markle ➜ czcams.com/video/P14uXRQhc_I/video.html ▪ 30 Things Meghan Markle Couldn’t Do After Marrying Prince Harry ➜ czcams.com/video/xQs-VOwIExE/video.html ▪ 20 Reasons Why Some British Don't Want Prince Charles To Be King ➜ youtu.be
1:55 King Charles doesn't *GOVERN* any state. He is Head of State. Those are not the same thing. 2:50 King Charles has a driver's license and passed his driving test at age 16. He doesn't need a license NOW that he is the monarch. He needed one before he became monarch. Surely the video makers aren't THAT fvcking stupid?! 5:02 He is NOT "immune from all legal proceedings". He is immune from proceedings in his capacity as an individual. The *office* of the Crown is still liable to charge and prosecution. 6:38 Appointing a PM. Simply wrong. The King CAN appoint whomever he wants from the elected members of parliament. It is simply convention (and has not always been followed) to appoint the member selected by the majority party. 9:40 The House of Lords rejects proposed bills All The Fvcking Time. Around 10% of all bills are rejected at least once by Lords. I give up. This video is simply utter tripe.
@@thesailormercury2 Yes, like in the unlikelihood he killed someone, drive his car in a drunken state, or committed a burglary lol. He should not be immune to prosecution,
@@arlenehiles2689 if he wants to in his words to make the monarchy modern then he should remove the immunity rule to show everyone that he is no difference then his subjects . heck his mother remove his brother immunity rule , for me what queen Elizabeth did to King Charles brother did was a Smart move.
It's Commonwealth Realms plural not singular, he holds all those thrones independently of each other and can lose them without affecting the other like Barbados that was mentioned. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are NOT independent nations, he is King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Note that the first three nations aren’t referred to by name.
Scotland is set to have another plebiscite soon on complete independence from England. They absolutely can secede from the United Kingdom and end it, since this is dependent on the unification of Scotland and England. Whether they elect to have the House of Windsor-Mountbatten as their head of State is up for grabs. Northern Ireland can choose to secede and join the Irish Republic. Wales seems to be the one nation least likely to vote for secession. Overseas within the Commonwealth, the Caribbean Nations, especially in Jamaica are seemingly likely to put a President in as head of State. The Government of Australia is in firm control of Republicans at the moment. Canadians seem less than thrilled now keeping the British Monarch as head of State. I do not see due to his quirkiness of personality and temperament Charles being able to hold all the different consistent parts of the realm together. He is a throwback to the Hanoverians and people will see this as time goes on. He does not seem to have inherited his Mothers sense of discretion, wisdom, and timing, nor her placid temperament.
The busiest people he's got to understand the British people he's got to understand that people will not be serving Kim was he wants to be the centre of attention the British people have got their own mate they can make their own minds up on Charles II and he's got the power to do that to rule the British people you haven't got not got the power just have people what to do and how to do it you have not got the power to do that people have got the right of opinion on child the third he's not going to make a good king like his mother was and the queen was a marvellous job and he's got a lot to live up to got a lot to live up to anything she's going to strike the people to tell him tell people what to do and he doesn't work like that do you do not tell people what to do they got their own opinions on Charles II and it will not make a great monarch and it's too old to be on the throne child of 30 is too old he's 75 years old you should have passed it down to William put his more younger and energetic and Catherine and William and more younger and energetic on the country far better than Charles and slimming down the monarchy he's not going to do much good slimming down the monarchy is a bad decision on Charles's Park slimming down the monarchy not going to get him any favours with the British people slimming the monarchy down and it does he think he is telling the British people you got to get control by Charles III doesn't work like that you don't people have got a lot to their opinion
@@arlenehiles2689 Her father was the first UK monarch to drive a motor vehicle. He was a very enthusiastic driver. More accurately, as Duke of York he learned to drive before his elder brother did but technically his brother was the first monarch to have driven while a monarch. George VI insisted upon only driving UK manufactured cars whereas Edward VII insisted on driving Mercedes's almost exclusively. Their Dad preferred Rolls and Bentley but never actually learned to drive one. Edward VII did drive as I said but like his Dad, he preferred to be driven. Their grandfather, Edward VII was the first British Monarch to ride in an automobile but never learned to drive. And of course Victoria, who died in 1901, never rode in a car though they certainly existed before her passing. I heard a story of how she had witnessed an automobile spooking a horse and so she considered them to be dangerous. Edward VIi also considered them to be dangerous at first but changed his mind later on.
@@dansmodacct Technically Driving licences and passports are issued in the Monarch's name so it is impossible for him to have a document issued to him by him.
That's not surprising, given how little Americans, including those that produced this video, know about the world outside their country. This piece is rife with errors. With awareness of it or not, you've fallen into an echo-chamber of innacuracies.
@@bayousbambino427 IN MY VIEW/ What's wrong with you? Do you not recognize when someone says something positive about another country. You have some ugliness inside your heart.
@@carolynthornton8017 LOL Aw, did you expect your ignorance to be enabled? That's precisely why your countrymen are stereotyped as clueless about the world beyond America's borders. This video is full of errors and you congratulated the creators for it. For shame.
@@rivenoak i meant how long is there left on his current licence, before it would need renewing if he was not the king. i would be happy to be driven everywhere not by the bus driver
In fact under the Succession to the Crown Act only the first six people in the line to the throne need the Sovereign's permission to marry. Also most if not all Royal Prerogatives are eiher done in the Sovereign's name by the Government or on the advice of the government.
Also worth noting: in the 14 realms outside of the UK the monarch is represented by a Governor-General (appointed by the monarch on the advice of the relevant PM) who carries out most of the monarch's duties and powers on the monarch's behalf. As well, the monarch is represented in the government each of the provinces/states/territories of Canada and Australia by a Lieutenant Governor (although they do not hold a specific title as monarch of each prov/state/terr)
Australian states have Governors not lieutenants. The states are much more powerful than Canadian provinces. The Territories have administrators except for the Australian Capital Territory which has a Republican form of government.
If the only person who can drive without a licence is the King, or presumably a Queen as well, then chances are he has a driving licence from when he passed as the prince.
Do you check your facts? The last time a British sovereign dismissed a prime minister was not in 1834, but in 1975, when the Queen's emissary in Australia dismissed a democratically elected PM by the name of Gough Whitlam. Every Australian knows this because it illustrates the reality of sovereign "reserve" powers.
The Monarch can choose anyone from the winning party to become Prime Minister, it does not have to be the leader of that party. However the Monarch as a general rule has appointed the leader of the winning party to be Prime Minister, but as mentioned it does not have to be. There are official websites that mention what powers the Monarch has, and the list is extensive. The above mentioned is just one of those powers.
Queen Victoria Granted Her Royal Licence and Authority to Benjamin Blaydes Haworth-Booth on 6 July 1869. The Grant was Irrevocable. Non of the so called royals have any powers at all.
@@markwindle9379 I am not so sure "Diana" died then but I am sure no babies came from those slimmer than shoulders hips. Do you know the difference between male and female skeletal anatomies?
21:00- That footage is NOT footage of the former Edward VIII's wedding to Wallis Simpson in 1937 after his 1936 Abdication. It's footage from 1923 of his next younger brother Albert, Duke of York's wedding to Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyons who'd become George VI and Queen Consort Elizabeth after the Abdication (and, yes, these were the parents of the recently deceased Elizabeth II and maternal grandparents of Charles III). George VI would die in 1952 while his widow survived as the Queen Mother until her death at age 101 in 2002! Oh, and the Queen Mother especially would have been infuriated to have been mistaken for the Duchess of Windsor who mutually detested each other!
I was fully prepared to give him a fair chance. Then he went and flapped his hand about because a pen was inconveniencing him 😤 Your Majesty, scoot it the fuck over.
He was sat in a very specific pise for media, who's cameras are fixed, lighting and site sites set, in front of a window of he shifts, lighting changes, media looks like shit.
@@mauricematla8379 ,,, simply because she and her family endured the Nazi bombs when they could have fled, and she herself served in auxiliary territory service - ATS. Her country revered her for it.
I love how people keep parroting that the King and The Royal Family are merely "symbolic." Kind of like an Italian Mafia Boss appointing a "Front Boss" (Prime Minister). The Royal Family was, is, has been, and are the true power. Plain and simple. Anyone that believes anything else is very naive. They only want you to believe they aren't the true power because it takes heat off of them. Rest assured, no politician in Great Britain has more power than The Royal Family/King. At the end of the day, they control the military. Whoever controls the military has the power. Plain and simple. Any "powers" given to Parliament in recent times, believe me, are merely symbolic and simply only on-paper, but they all know who really has final say.....The Crown.
In Australia the governor general represents the queen and now the new king .and in 1972 the governor general dismissed the prim minister and appointed the leader of the opposition as the new prime minister awaiting a new election. The famous words said by the deposed prime minister were "Well may we say God save the queen but who will save the governor general".
In other words, the representative of the distinct Queen of Australia did his job, but ignorant Aussies think some colonial master oppressed their democracy. It's sad when demands from change grow from stupidity.
Welcome to Australia. The most racist country on the planet. Anyone tell the white folks down there that they are descendants of criminals and not native to those lands?
The king can fire a Prime Minister! Does the rule only apply to the UK, or does Canada apply as well? Getting rid of Trudeau would certainly boost Royal popularity around here
Do you have any control over how many ads punctuate your video? If so, please thin it out. I love your content, but I'm bailing because it's so irritating to hit these ever few seconds.
He is not the King of England, nor of Scotland or Wales. He is the King of the United Kingdom. And it's prosecution not persecution. Actually, there are so many other mistakes here that to list them would take longer than the video.
At 1:52 of the video, there is an error. The British Monarch does not govern any Commonwealth nations. King Charles III is the Head of State, yes, but he does not dictate any government policies of those nations.
A surprising omission here is the Crown Privilege, whereby the Sovereign can withhold information from courts, or anyone else. The Sovereign also has access to intelligence information, which the Government cannot keep from him/her. In practice it is not known how much GCHQ/MI6 skullduggery is concealed by the intelligence community, but the power of such privilege is certainly greater than many of the ceremonial powers like the never-invoked denial of Royal Assent.
Correction, the Prime Minister is not chosen based on the party that won a majority of seats in Parliament, it is based on the party that won a plurality of seats, i.e. the party that more seats than any other, it does not need to hold a majority of the seats. As well, parties can form a coalition to combine for a plurality.
You do know that charles, before he became king, had taken his driving test over 50 years ago. So whether it is legal for him NOT to need a license is somewhat moot given he has one anyway.
Ok I have a question I've seen it quoted here and elsewhere 'the ruling Monarch is the only person in the uk who never needs to pass a driving test' and 'Charles never had to pass a driving test' so given that he has driven in the past and wasn't the reigning Monarch the math doesn't seem to add up
He can choose his own name. Nobody in the royal family can marry anyone without his permission. He has final say over the names of royal family members. In other words, anyone who is an HRH or the child of an HRH and anyone who is a non HRH sibling of the monarch needs the monarch's permission to give a particular name to their newborn child. Likewise no one in the above categories can change their name without the monarch's permission. He can wear the uniform of an officer of any branch of the military. He can visit any military institution, station, fort etc and any vessel. He can talk to any government employee he wants to and they can't refuse. He can order the creation of a new medal for the military and he can grant it to any member of the military he chooses. He can access any top secret document he wants to. The monarch can only abdicate if they have not yet had a coronation. Once crowned the monarch cannot legally abdicate. He could declare himself abdicated but the government is banned from recognizing anyone else as monarch until he dies. There have been a handful of exceptions but they have been forced to abdicate under threat of death. In fact more monarchs have been executed than have legally abdicated. The part of the coronation ceremony that excludes legal abdication as a possibility is the anointment. British monarchs are the only ones that are anointed. The anointment basically means that only God can unmake the monarch. In theory, a monarch can choose not to be anointed. This might be an indication they intend to abdicate at some point. Also in theory the government could retroactively not recognize this aspect of the coronation as legitimate. The government could also change the laws effectively deposing the monarch and declare itself a republic or declare an interregnum (space between kings) during which time the country is a de facto republic such as happened with the first Charles and a fellow named Cromwell. The monarch could be declared unable to rule and a regent would be appointed though today they have a regency council who would collectively rule in his stead or they could choose someone (likely the prince of Wales) to be the regent. Charles could request that if he felt it was time to retire. At that point all the powers of king would be bestowed upon the regent. He can turn anyone into a royal or noble that he chooses and he can take those statuses away any time he chooses. Charles is believed to be planning to reduce the number of HRH's on the roster.
You incorrectly used the word persecute when you should have prosecute. King Charles is immune from prosecution, not persecution. Persecution - hostility and ill-treatment, especially because of race or political or religious beliefs. Prosecution - the institution and conducting of legal proceedings against someone in respect of a criminal charge. You can't charge His majesty with crime, but you can pick on him.
“Things King Charles III has the power to do.” Well, everything Queen Elizabeth II has the power to do, Charles now has the power to do. Saved you 21 minutes of your life.
@@detroiterhere4897 Most of the powers discussed in this video amount to very little. Real power, ones that can shape politics are limited to Inviting a representative of Parliament to form a Government in his name. It does not have to be the party elected to power, but to denying the Elected party the right to govern would be tantamount to political suicide. He has the right to dissolve Parliament but with the same result. He however has the Right to be consulted, the right to warn, and the right to encourage. He is also the titular head of the Armed Forces. These are the only meaningful prerogatives the Monarch in Britain has. Time will tell whether Charles remains within these legal boundaries. His right as Moderator of the Church of England does not even carry over into the wider Anglican Communion.
2:51 you say that King Charles III has never passed a driver's test - true enough. But Prince Charles of Whales has passed a driver's test and was issued a driver's, so has princess Elizabeth. Also 4:01 - it's "prosecution" not persecution.
😢😢 lucky you; who wouldn't want to be king. Everyone love there mom so my highest condolence to the monarch and congratulations and I pray you be a good KING.
Best Autobiography: ================ When I was a child my father cheated and didn't love my family. Later my parents divorced. Soon my mother died in a car accident. My brother & I could only live in my grandma's old house. The whole family lived on my grandma's savings. Gramdma just died. Dad, now 73 had to go out to work to support the family. =Prince William=
...I do not think that means what you think that means... "Defender of the Faith" is a title that was given to Henry VIII by the Pope, and which was assumed by his successors, and has nothing to do with their position as the Head of the Church of England. It is Charles III's position as the Head of the Church of England that gives him the right to appoint Archbishops and Bishops, *NOT* his title as "Defender of the Faith", which is an inherited honorary title once bestowed by the Pope on one of his predecessors....
Well, wasn't that revealing or rather, confirming? I'd heard long ago that the sovereign there ". . . retained all powers unto self on condition that they not be used . . . excepting for in emergencies-dire." (reconstituted from long-ago memory) Of course none others can determine such said direness but for the sovereign! Also, as cutting directly to the chase on this, the Sovereign is not above the law but rather, IS the Law per se, as intercessor posed between God Almighty and the sovereign's subjects. (These popularly believing themselves "citizens," such belief being but strictly nominal.) Fascinating and, very useful as a summing-up of the key matter. . : .
Speed limit one kinda irrelevant, he could travel down a country road at 100mph on his own in a race car without police escort if he wanted because he's above the law anyway.
The United States exists because of taxation without representation. If George III was allowed to skip taxes, couldn't the same right be granted to the colonies?
Your Majesty King Charles lll. It is written! Thou shalt arise, and have mercy upon Zion; for the time to favour her, yea,the set time is come.Ps.102:13. Amen. God save the King.
Showing Liz Truss while saying the Prime-Minister is chosen democratically 💀. Also saying Charles rarely drives him self is false. He said he prefers to drive him self and does the 9/10 times
Actually he's not completely immune to criminal punishments. Let's say he commits a crime here in the Americas, while he can't be sent to prison, he and his country can be sanctioned. In other words we can make life very hard for his citizens, and they in turn can make life very hard for him.
1. Be as king of the uk and the commonwealth realm (Google it) 2. Drive without a driver's license. (He doesn't even have a license.) 3. Drive without a license plate. 4. Decide the royal dress code. (Gets to decide what the royals wear, can ban a color or hairstyle. Final say on it) 5. Sovereign Immunity (Immune to all laws) 6. Approves royal proposal 7. Appoint a prime minister 8. Dismiss a prime minister(Highly unlikely) 9. Open parlament 10. Appoint members to the house of lords. (Second chamber of parlament) 11. Appoint supreme court 12. Declare war(Head of armed forces) 13. Skip taxes😡 14. Travel without a passport 15. Grant a pardon to criminals 16. To avoid jury duty 17. Legitimize laws 18. No speed limit(Can go as fast as he want) 19. Celebrate 2 birthdays(Tradition) 20. Keep all his finances private Thank me later.
He can be tried for Criminal Treason against the position of the Monarch. The position is what an individual inherits. Also, remember James I. Although Oliver Cromwell did much worse damage to the nation.
King Charles does not need a driving licence or passport now. when he was prince Charles he had both. queen Elizabeth learned to drive with the bsm and when she became queen did not need a driving licence either.
🟢 Must Watch Videos:
▪ 20 Reasons Why King Charles III Will Be a Successful King ➜ czcams.com/video/SzXOTA9mKTY/video.html
▪ 30 Things You Never Knew About King Charles III ➜ czcams.com/video/c1FXIObbyuw/video.html
▪ 30 Royal Rules Broken by Meghan Markle ➜ czcams.com/video/P14uXRQhc_I/video.html
▪ 30 Things Meghan Markle Couldn’t Do After Marrying Prince Harry ➜ czcams.com/video/xQs-VOwIExE/video.html
▪ 20 Reasons Why Some British Don't Want Prince Charles To Be King ➜ youtu.be
Are there as many errors in those videos as there are in this one?
@@bayousbambino427 I can see a couple- most notably the 30 royal Rules broken by the Duchess of Sussex.
There was
1:55 King Charles doesn't *GOVERN* any state. He is Head of State. Those are not the same thing.
2:50 King Charles has a driver's license and passed his driving test at age 16. He doesn't need a license NOW that he is the monarch. He needed one before he became monarch. Surely the video makers aren't THAT fvcking stupid?!
5:02 He is NOT "immune from all legal proceedings". He is immune from proceedings in his capacity as an individual. The *office* of the Crown is still liable to charge and prosecution.
6:38 Appointing a PM. Simply wrong. The King CAN appoint whomever he wants from the elected members of parliament. It is simply convention (and has not always been followed) to appoint the member selected by the majority party.
9:40 The House of Lords rejects proposed bills All The Fvcking Time. Around 10% of all bills are rejected at least once by Lords.
I give up. This video is simply utter tripe.
Why would you want to like your own comment?
Charles III is literally the King of Canada, not just the head of state. Canada has a King.
I wouldn’t expect much from this video, half the things are exaggerated or just unconfirmed rumours spoken as fact
Along with pretty boy PM Trudeau
Don't suppose he can 'do something' about 'Emperor Palpuotine' - preferably something involving a gibbet...
@@mikejohnson5884 Canadian PM Justin Trudeau has gotten good looks from his mother Margaret who was very pretty as a young woman.
@@65mcman he is king of Canada.
It’s really weird not to see Queen Elizabeth in the pictures.😢
I know right
I also think some of the powers he or she has should be removed or change?
It’s also weird it’s already been a month
@@thesailormercury2 Yes, like in the unlikelihood he killed someone, drive his car in a drunken state, or committed a burglary lol. He should not be immune to prosecution,
@@arlenehiles2689 if he wants to in his words to make the monarchy modern then he should remove the immunity rule to show everyone that he is no difference then his subjects .
heck his mother remove his brother immunity rule , for me what queen Elizabeth did to King Charles brother did was a Smart move.
its great
It’s prosecution not persecution! They are very different terms.
Ok, and?
What he said
Yes though they often go hand in hand.
Words do have meaning and are important. I've heard so-called journalists make this mistake many times.
Persecuting is akin to being hunted lol. You are right.
It's Commonwealth Realms plural not singular, he holds all those thrones independently of each other and can lose them without affecting the other like Barbados that was mentioned. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are NOT independent nations, he is King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Note that the first three nations aren’t referred to by name.
Scotland is set to have another plebiscite soon on complete independence from England. They absolutely can secede from the United Kingdom and end it, since this is dependent on the unification of Scotland and England. Whether they elect to have the House of Windsor-Mountbatten as their head of State is up for grabs. Northern Ireland can choose to secede and join the Irish Republic. Wales seems to be the one nation least likely to vote for secession. Overseas within the Commonwealth, the Caribbean Nations, especially in Jamaica are seemingly likely to put a President in as head of State. The Government of Australia is in firm control of Republicans at the moment. Canadians seem less than thrilled now keeping the British Monarch as head of State. I do not see due to his quirkiness of personality and temperament Charles being able to hold all the different consistent parts of the realm together. He is a throwback to the Hanoverians and people will see this as time goes on. He does not seem to have inherited his Mothers sense of discretion, wisdom, and timing, nor her placid temperament.
Jamaica us strongly talking about exiting as per my Jamaican friends info.
Canada. May in 5 yrs also
@@boessheila50 yes you are right Jamaican Pm has said to prince william that his country is going to move on from the monarchy .
The busiest people he's got to understand the British people he's got to understand that people will not be serving Kim was he wants to be the centre of attention the British people have got their own mate they can make their own minds up on Charles II and he's got the power to do that to rule the British people you haven't got not got the power just have people what to do and how to do it you have not got the power to do that people have got the right of opinion on child the third he's not going to make a good king like his mother was and the queen was a marvellous job and he's got a lot to live up to got a lot to live up to anything she's going to strike the people to tell him tell people what to do and he doesn't work like that do you do not tell people what to do they got their own opinions on Charles II and it will not make a great monarch and it's too old to be on the throne child of 30 is too old he's 75 years old you should have passed it down to William put his more younger and energetic and Catherine and William and more younger and energetic on the country far better than Charles and slimming down the monarchy he's not going to do much good slimming down the monarchy is a bad decision on Charles's Park slimming down the monarchy not going to get him any favours with the British people slimming the monarchy down and it does he think he is telling the British people you got to get control by Charles III doesn't work like that you don't people have got a lot to their opinion
Weirdly, he already has a driving license because he passed his driving test around 50 years ago.
And her late majesty got hers during WWII.
@@nunyabiznez6381 Yes she did, as well as also train to be a car mechanic.
@@arlenehiles2689 Her father was the first UK monarch to drive a motor vehicle. He was a very enthusiastic driver. More accurately, as Duke of York he learned to drive before his elder brother did but technically his brother was the first monarch to have driven while a monarch. George VI insisted upon only driving UK manufactured cars whereas Edward VII insisted on driving Mercedes's almost exclusively. Their Dad preferred Rolls and Bentley but never actually learned to drive one. Edward VII did drive as I said but like his Dad, he preferred to be driven. Their grandfather, Edward VII was the first British Monarch to ride in an automobile but never learned to drive. And of course Victoria, who died in 1901, never rode in a car though they certainly existed before her passing. I heard a story of how she had witnessed an automobile spooking a horse and so she considered them to be dangerous. Edward VIi also considered them to be dangerous at first but changed his mind later on.
The monarch doesn’t need a drivers license. He is the drivers license.
@@dansmodacct Technically Driving licences and passports are issued in the Monarch's name so it is impossible for him to have a document issued to him by him.
IN MY VIEW
As an American I found this fascinating watching and learning about your new King and his duties. Thank you.
That's not surprising, given how little Americans, including those that produced this video, know about the world outside their country. This piece is rife with errors. With awareness of it or not, you've fallen into an echo-chamber of innacuracies.
@@bayousbambino427 IN MY VIEW/ What's wrong with you? Do you not recognize when someone says something positive about another country. You have some ugliness inside your heart.
@@carolynthornton8017 LOL Aw, did you expect your ignorance to be enabled? That's precisely why your countrymen are stereotyped as clueless about the world beyond America's borders. This video is full of errors and you congratulated the creators for it. For shame.
@@bayousbambino427We actually fought a war so we didn't have to care, so we don't really get into the details that much.
@@lostamericanhistory2536 Is that supposed to be a brag?
His Majesty King Charles III did pass a driving test. He was only a prince then so he needed a license to drive.
this is what i was going to say, i wonder how long he has left before it needs renewing
@@gerrimilner9448 renewal is off the table now. his medical team may advise to stop driving but the decision is up to charles
@@rivenoak i meant how long is there left on his current licence, before it would need renewing if he was not the king. i would be happy to be driven everywhere not by the bus driver
In fact under the Succession to the Crown Act only the first six people in the line to the throne need the Sovereign's permission to marry. Also most if not all Royal Prerogatives are eiher done in the Sovereign's name by the Government or on the advice of the government.
Barbados has been self governing since 1961 and has celebrated 30 November as its Independence Day since 1966 when it gained full independence.
You're right. Barbados was independent, they have only recently changed their head of state.
Hope other countries would do soon.... These reptiles should only be on that fucked up island
@@thegr8dowite What fucked up island. I hope you are not talking about my country.
@@jimbo6059 not at all sir
2:40 Licence - he has the ones he got while his mother was alive and the monarch...
Does not need is not the same as does not have!
Why do Americans always get things wrong?
The King does not govern, he reigns. He is a constitutional monarchy.
Where did he get all those medals ! He never fought in any war
Also worth noting: in the 14 realms outside of the UK the monarch is represented by a Governor-General (appointed by the monarch on the advice of the relevant PM) who carries out most of the monarch's duties and powers on the monarch's behalf.
As well, the monarch is represented in the government each of the provinces/states/territories of Canada and Australia by a Lieutenant Governor (although they do not hold a specific title as monarch of each prov/state/terr)
Australian states have Governors not lieutenants. The states are much more powerful than Canadian provinces. The Territories have administrators except for the Australian Capital Territory which has a Republican form of government.
Still very embarrassing to be one of them.
If the only person who can drive without a licence is the King, or presumably a Queen as well, then chances are he has a driving licence from when he passed as the prince.
needs renewing every 3 years after 70 wo'nt need to do that now.
Charles went to Gordonstoun, said as Gordonstun NOT Gordonstown, which the narrators keep saying.
Narrator used the wrong word several times. It should be “prosecute”, not “persecute”.
Do you check your facts? The last time a British sovereign dismissed a prime minister was not in 1834, but in 1975, when the Queen's emissary in Australia dismissed a democratically elected PM by the name of Gough Whitlam. Every Australian knows this because it illustrates the reality of sovereign "reserve" powers.
The Monarch can choose anyone from the winning party to become Prime Minister, it does not have to be the leader of that party. However the Monarch as a general rule has appointed the leader of the winning party to be Prime Minister, but as mentioned it does not have to be. There are official websites that mention what powers the Monarch has, and the list is extensive. The above mentioned is just one of those powers.
I would add this is only in theory in reality if he ignored the election result he’d likely be deposed
He gets told wat to do by Catholic order. If he or others step too far he meet Diana
Queen Victoria Granted Her Royal Licence and Authority to Benjamin Blaydes Haworth-Booth on 6 July 1869. The Grant was Irrevocable. Non of the so called royals have any powers at all.
@@markwindle9379 I am not so sure "Diana" died then but I am sure no babies came from those slimmer than shoulders hips. Do you know the difference between male and female skeletal anatomies?
@@markwindle9379 what are you talking about
21:00- That footage is NOT footage of the former Edward VIII's wedding to Wallis Simpson in 1937 after his 1936 Abdication. It's footage from 1923 of his next younger brother Albert, Duke of York's wedding to Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyons who'd become George VI and Queen Consort Elizabeth after the Abdication (and, yes, these were the parents of the recently deceased Elizabeth II and maternal grandparents of Charles III). George VI would die in 1952 while his widow survived as the Queen Mother until her death at age 101 in 2002! Oh, and the Queen Mother especially would have been infuriated to have been mistaken for the Duchess of Windsor who mutually detested each other!
The King has also the power to ask others to take away his pen that is in his way.
Yes because he can’t do it for himself can he 😤
I was fully prepared to give him a fair chance. Then he went and flapped his hand about because a pen was inconveniencing him 😤 Your Majesty, scoot it the fuck over.
He was sat in a very specific pise for media, who's cameras are fixed, lighting and site sites set, in front of a window of he shifts, lighting changes, media looks like shit.
The monarch doesn't own all the swans - they only own the ones on certain stretches of the Thames.
I completely agree. Queen Elizabeth was such a multi representation of war hero and grandmother also highly respected woman of dignity and honor.
War hero ?
@@mauricematla8379 ,,, simply because she and her family endured the Nazi bombs when they could have fled, and she herself served in auxiliary territory service - ATS. Her country revered her for it.
@@LL-lj1kq So what do you make of my grandparents then ?
@Legion There's been more wars than just the world wars buddy.
It means there’s been more wars than just the world wars..
I love how people keep parroting that the King and The Royal Family are merely "symbolic." Kind of like an Italian Mafia Boss appointing a "Front Boss" (Prime Minister). The Royal Family was, is, has been, and are the true power. Plain and simple. Anyone that believes anything else is very naive.
They only want you to believe they aren't the true power because it takes heat off of them. Rest assured, no politician in Great Britain has more power than The Royal Family/King.
At the end of the day, they control the military. Whoever controls the military has the power. Plain and simple. Any "powers" given to Parliament in recent times, believe me, are merely symbolic and simply only on-paper, but they all know who really has final say.....The Crown.
It's not " Legal persecution" ...ITS LEGAL PROSECUTION......
@Asherz Stuff how so...I am pretty sure I speak the Queen's perfectly...now with a name like yours.....really...
@Asherz Stuff you need to take a look at your own spelling.... It's BECAUSE....NOT...."BECASUE"
@Asherz Stuff be careful accusing me of that....I will go to the police to report you after I report you to CZcams
The PM is CUSTOMARILY the leader of the most voted party. It is not required
Failed in the first minute - he's the king of Scots. He is not the King of Scotland. In Scotland, the people are sovereign
The Queens Representative dismissed the Prime Minister of Australia in 1974.
Regards,
Geoff. Reeks
Whilst you are correct, the decision had to be ratified by the Monarch before it was made official and public.
In Australia the governor general represents the queen and now the new king .and in 1972 the governor general dismissed the prim minister and appointed the leader of the opposition as the new prime minister awaiting a new election.
The famous words said by the deposed prime minister were "Well may we say God save the queen but who will save the governor general".
He held up the democratic and legislative process. So he was dismissed and a new general election was called by the Governor General.
In other words, the representative of the distinct Queen of Australia did his job, but ignorant Aussies think some colonial master oppressed their democracy. It's sad when demands from change grow from stupidity.
@@Stand663 Exactly.
Welcome to Australia. The most racist country on the planet. Anyone tell the white folks down there that they are descendants of criminals and not native to those lands?
The king can fire a Prime Minister! Does the rule only apply to the UK, or does Canada apply as well? Getting rid of Trudeau would certainly boost Royal popularity around here
Many of these things were slightly wrong. And the word you were looking for is prosecution not persecution.
In #5, you twice use PERSECUTION when you mean PROSECUTION. They mean different things.
Long life to The King. Healthy, happy and GLORIOUS
Do you have any control over how many ads punctuate your video? If so, please thin it out. I love your content, but I'm bailing because it's so irritating to hit these ever few seconds.
He is not the King of England, nor of Scotland or Wales. He is the King of the United Kingdom. And it's prosecution not persecution. Actually, there are so many other mistakes here that to list them would take longer than the video.
Wow thanks for the video
You mean thanks for the misinformation.
Fascinating. I did not know most of these things. Very informative and well presented. 👍🏻☮️
Um, maybe someone should look up the difference between persecution and prosecution (wrt sovereign immunity).
At 1:52 of the video, there is an error. The British Monarch does not govern any Commonwealth nations. King Charles III is the Head of State, yes, but he does not dictate any government policies of those nations.
A surprising omission here is the Crown Privilege, whereby the Sovereign can withhold information from courts, or anyone else. The Sovereign also has access to intelligence information, which the Government cannot keep from him/her.
In practice it is not known how much GCHQ/MI6 skullduggery is concealed by the intelligence community, but the power of such privilege is certainly greater than many of the ceremonial powers like the never-invoked denial of Royal Assent.
Very interesting to know this kind of things thank you.
Correction, the Prime Minister is not chosen based on the party that won a majority of seats in Parliament, it is based on the party that won a plurality of seats, i.e. the party that more seats than any other, it does not need to hold a majority of the seats. As well, parties can form a coalition to combine for a plurality.
He is immune from prosecution, not persecution. Oy yeh.
King Charles III has the power to dissolve parliament, which will keep the tradition going.
1. Serve as King. Wow so you're telling me that the king can serve as king? I would not have guessed. You people are fucking genius!
You do know that charles, before he became king, had taken his driving test over 50 years ago. So whether it is legal for him NOT to need a license is somewhat moot given he has one anyway.
Do the driver's licenses have expiration dates in UK? Many countries do.
Emergency vehicles in the UK are only allowed to travel 15MPH over the Speed limit on a Blue Light Run!
His Majesty is the LAW.
😂😂
I bet they regretted The Approval of the Royal Proposals for Meghan..
A pity your editor didn't know the difference beween the Royal Arms and members of the Armed Services bearing their rifles
Ok I have a question I've seen it quoted here and elsewhere 'the ruling Monarch is the only person in the uk who never needs to pass a driving test' and 'Charles never had to pass a driving test' so given that he has driven in the past and wasn't the reigning Monarch the math doesn't seem to add up
The fact British people still want a king is beyond me. This is ridiculous
Sovereign immunity - what about - Clause 61 Magna Carta (1215)?
He can choose his own name. Nobody in the royal family can marry anyone without his permission. He has final say over the names of royal family members. In other words, anyone who is an HRH or the child of an HRH and anyone who is a non HRH sibling of the monarch needs the monarch's permission to give a particular name to their newborn child. Likewise no one in the above categories can change their name without the monarch's permission. He can wear the uniform of an officer of any branch of the military. He can visit any military institution, station, fort etc and any vessel. He can talk to any government employee he wants to and they can't refuse. He can order the creation of a new medal for the military and he can grant it to any member of the military he chooses. He can access any top secret document he wants to.
The monarch can only abdicate if they have not yet had a coronation. Once crowned the monarch cannot legally abdicate. He could declare himself abdicated but the government is banned from recognizing anyone else as monarch until he dies. There have been a handful of exceptions but they have been forced to abdicate under threat of death. In fact more monarchs have been executed than have legally abdicated. The part of the coronation ceremony that excludes legal abdication as a possibility is the anointment. British monarchs are the only ones that are anointed. The anointment basically means that only God can unmake the monarch. In theory, a monarch can choose not to be anointed. This might be an indication they intend to abdicate at some point. Also in theory the government could retroactively not recognize this aspect of the coronation as legitimate. The government could also change the laws effectively deposing the monarch and declare itself a republic or declare an interregnum (space between kings) during which time the country is a de facto republic such as happened with the first Charles and a fellow named Cromwell. The monarch could be declared unable to rule and a regent would be appointed though today they have a regency council who would collectively rule in his stead or they could choose someone (likely the prince of Wales) to be the regent. Charles could request that if he felt it was time to retire. At that point all the powers of king would be bestowed upon the regent. He can turn anyone into a royal or noble that he chooses and he can take those statuses away any time he chooses. Charles is believed to be planning to reduce the number of HRH's on the roster.
The last time a Monarch dismissed a Prime Minister was Lord Melbourne.
Gough Whitlam: "Are you f**king serious?!"
To be honest, he can probably do what he wants. Doubtful anyone would really tell him no
You incorrectly used the word persecute when you should have prosecute. King Charles is immune from prosecution, not persecution. Persecution - hostility and ill-treatment, especially because of race or political or religious beliefs. Prosecution - the institution and conducting of legal proceedings against someone in respect of a criminal charge. You can't charge His majesty with crime, but you can pick on him.
Time to open the drapes and let some light in.
“Things King Charles III has the power to do.” Well, everything Queen Elizabeth II has the power to do, Charles now has the power to do. Saved you 21 minutes of your life.
And for those that didn't know of her powers? What a ridiculous post!
@@detroiterhere4897 Most of the powers discussed in this video amount to very little. Real power, ones that can shape politics are limited to Inviting a representative of Parliament to form a Government in his name. It does not have to be the party elected to power, but to denying the Elected party the right to govern would be tantamount to political suicide. He has the right to dissolve Parliament but with the same result. He however has the Right to be consulted, the right to warn, and the right to encourage. He is also the titular head of the Armed Forces. These are the only meaningful prerogatives the Monarch in Britain has. Time will tell whether Charles remains within these legal boundaries. His right as Moderator of the Church of England does not even carry over into the wider Anglican Communion.
@@vernonsheldon-witter1225 Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful reply 👍
King Charles doesn't need a license now but he had one before.
I and most others don't see things the same way as king big ears does but then again we can't shove our heads up our own backsides.
He kind of looks like his ears have been pinned back. Did he sneak and have surgery?
God has always been in control 🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂
2:51 you say that King Charles III has never passed a driver's test - true enough. But Prince Charles of Whales has passed a driver's test and was issued a driver's, so has princess Elizabeth. Also 4:01 - it's "prosecution" not persecution.
They missed one when King Chuck flaps his ears he can fly.
I'm pretty sure he at least had a drivers licence... for the longest time he was just a prince and during that time he drove a car at one point...
The narrator needs to learn the difference between “persecution” and “prosecution.”
Please learn the difference between the two words 'persecution' and prosecution'.
😢😢 lucky you; who wouldn't want to be king. Everyone love there mom so my highest condolence to the monarch and congratulations and I pray you be a good KING.
It's true that the king can get away with murder, but only so long as he is ruler. Should he abdicate, he would be charged with that murder.
Best Autobiography:
================
When I was a child my father cheated and didn't love my family.
Later my parents divorced. Soon my mother died in a car accident. My brother & I could only live in my grandma's old house. The whole family lived on my grandma's savings. Gramdma just died. Dad, now 73 had to go out to work to support the family. =Prince William=
So basically he's untouchable and can pretty much do as he pleases regardless
Who voted for this man to be head of state? Nobody.
...I do not think that means what you think that means...
"Defender of the Faith" is a title that was given to Henry VIII by the Pope, and which was assumed by his successors, and has nothing to do with their position as the Head of the Church of England.
It is Charles III's position as the Head of the Church of England that gives him the right to appoint Archbishops and Bishops, *NOT* his title as "Defender of the Faith", which is an inherited honorary title once bestowed by the Pope on one of his predecessors....
Well, wasn't that revealing or rather, confirming?
I'd heard long ago that the sovereign there ". . . retained all powers unto self on condition that they not be used . . . excepting for in emergencies-dire." (reconstituted from long-ago memory)
Of course none others can determine such said direness but for the sovereign!
Also, as cutting directly to the chase on this, the Sovereign is not above the law but rather, IS the Law per se, as intercessor posed between God Almighty and the sovereign's subjects. (These popularly believing themselves "citizens," such belief being but strictly nominal.)
Fascinating and, very useful as a summing-up of the key matter.
. : .
Speed limit one kinda irrelevant, he could travel down a country road at 100mph on his own in a race car without police escort if he wanted because he's above the law anyway.
Thanks for the information.
Script sounds like it was written by a school child trying to write a 2k word essay.
The United States exists because of taxation without representation. If George III was allowed to skip taxes, couldn't the same right be granted to the colonies?
4:03 the sovereign is not immune from persecution, the sovereign is immune from prosecution. Thumbs down since you don't know the difference.
He will be very good king one of the best.
😂😂😂
If he has no say in who the Prime Minister is then he doesn’t have the right to appoint a Prime Minister.
Your Majesty King Charles lll.
It is written! Thou shalt arise, and have mercy upon Zion; for the time to favour her, yea,the set time is come.Ps.102:13. Amen.
God save the King.
Charles Passed his driving test in 1967 he holds a driving license.
Showing Liz Truss while saying the Prime-Minister is chosen democratically 💀. Also saying Charles rarely drives him self is false. He said he prefers to drive him self and does the 9/10 times
Actually he's not completely immune to criminal punishments. Let's say he commits a crime here in the Americas, while he can't be sent to prison, he and his country can be sanctioned. In other words we can make life very hard for his citizens, and they in turn can make life very hard for him.
I too have the power to end dinner parties in my house.
Then again, the video is entertaining ...
So the crown DOES have some power...
1. Be as king of the uk and the commonwealth realm (Google it)
2. Drive without a driver's license. (He doesn't even have a license.)
3. Drive without a license plate.
4. Decide the royal dress code. (Gets to decide what the royals wear, can ban a color or hairstyle. Final say on it)
5. Sovereign Immunity (Immune to all laws)
6. Approves royal proposal
7. Appoint a prime minister
8. Dismiss a prime minister(Highly unlikely)
9. Open parlament
10. Appoint members to the house of lords. (Second chamber of parlament)
11. Appoint supreme court
12. Declare war(Head of armed forces)
13. Skip taxes😡
14. Travel without a passport
15. Grant a pardon to criminals
16. To avoid jury duty
17. Legitimize laws
18. No speed limit(Can go as fast as he want)
19. Celebrate 2 birthdays(Tradition)
20. Keep all his finances private
Thank me later.
When Wealth is Lost Nothing is Lost;
When Health is Lost Somethings are Lost;
When CHARACTER is Lost All is Lost ! 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
A lot I did not know. When the Queen was dying, they were burning rubber, to get there!
Go to 15:35 and mr bean is shaking the kings hand
Not persecution, but prosecution.
He has the power to turn his country into a republic
One thing he has to know is,this is not westeros,africa no longer bow down,only the presidents,bt we respect him too
the amount of inaccuracies in this is amazing.
Then, please, do fill us in to accuracy's completeness?
We await this . . .
31) king Charles III owns all pets in United Kingdom
🤗
Interesting.
"Wrong" is the word you were looking for.
He can be tried for Criminal Treason against the position of the Monarch. The position is what an individual inherits. Also, remember James I. Although Oliver Cromwell did much worse damage to the nation.
King Charles does not need a driving licence or passport now. when he was prince Charles he had both. queen Elizabeth learned to drive with the bsm and when she became queen did not need a driving licence either.
The King's birthday (which ever day it is) is not a public holiday in UK