The Prince of Wales Current Events 7: 27 September 2007-1 January 2008

[Al_bina]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

When you are out for a nice canter, the last thing anybody wants or needs is a bunch of hoons hanging over a hedge. When they start taking their non descript pictures, the noise and the flash can really startle a horse, or perhaps that was what they were hoping for!
-------------------------------

Charles performs very many duties, some in the full glare of the media, others outside the glare. It is a sorry state of affairs when anyone would begrudge him a peaceful ride on one of his horses, which despite the write ups was not a chestnut, but a bay!

Well … Given the fact that flashes can startle a horse and create a life-threatening situation for a rider, why does the Prince Charles’s security allows these things to take place? I assume that Heir Apparent of the stable democratic monarchy would not be against of having some privileges of Presidents from countries with ancient undemocratic regimes.
As for Prince Charles' grudges, it is called “showing human side” in the British Royal family. Reporters should get used to it.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

Well … Given the fact that flashes can startle a horse and create a life-threatening situation for a rider, why does the Prince Charles’s security allows these things to take place? I assume that Heir Apparent of the stable democratic monarchy would not be against of having some privileges of Presidents from countries with ancient undemocratic regimes.
As for Prince Charles' grudges, it is called “showing human side” in the British Royal family. Reporters should get used to it.

I'm sure none of us really wants to get to the stage where, even taking a horse out means he would have to be surrounded by gun toting security officers.

It would be rather difficult for them to carry a firearm, let alone fire one, whilst tearing about the fields on horseback. His security team would have been mounted on quads or would have followed in Range Rovers, close enough to 'keep an eye open' without 'crowding' him.

As the ghastly media men and women were on a public road, with telephoto lenses, they felt it was their right to hound Charles. What a great pity we couldn't have called in the cavalry with their sabres!

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

Well … Given the fact that flashes can startle a horse and create a life-threatening situation for a rider, why does the Prince Charles’s security allows these things to take place? I assume that Heir Apparent of the stable democratic monarchy would not be against of having some privileges of Presidents from countries with ancient undemocratic regimes.
As for Prince Charles' grudges, it is called “showing human side” in the British Royal family. Reporters should get used to it.

Why is it that the people who have never had the problem of being crowded in by media and thus feeling chased and victimized believe it is right to do that to another person? It may be that the law allows reporters to stand on a public road flashing lights in the face of a rider, but does that make it right? I don't think so.

There is another aspect: the more the media chases a person, the more the person tend to search for privacy. But that is then called "hiding" - what a joke!

[Elspeth]

Time for a new thread, which can be found here.