[Cfox]

I can see this is pointless. My position is that any Canadian citizen who(m) ? commits a crime within Canada should be charged with that crime when proven to have committed that crime by a court of law in Canada. If The Queen commits or causes to be committed a crime in Canada, the worst action we can do to Her is expulsion from Canada, due to the aforementioned legislation. The Representatives, being the Governor General, Lieutenant Governors and others, do not have the protection of Interpretation Act, section 17. Therefore she should not be able to use the defense afforded to THE Queen, and must face punishment for the crimes she has admitted.

[andyt]

The legislation doesn't say she has diplomatic immunity - if she did we could expel her and never let her back in. That would be funny - the head of a government denied admittance to the country. She has immunity because the is the head of government. I bet dollars to donuts they have the same law in England. It's a law I don't agree with.

[Cfox]

Obviously.

[Proculation]

andyt andyt:

The legislation doesn't say she has diplomatic immunity - if she did we could expel her and never let her back in. That would be funny - the head of a government denied admittance to the country. She has immunity because the is the head of government. I bet dollars to donuts they have the same law in England. It's a law I don't agree with.

Head of state. Not government.

But, as Canadians, we are British citizens so maybe she could expels herself to London.

[Proculation]

British subjects, sorry.

[ccga3359]

andyt andyt:

...It's a law I don't agree with.

Doesn't bother me one bit. Don't think her Maj is out breaking any laws after dark like spray painting "ER" all over the neighbourhood or refusing topledgeeallegiancee to herself. As a titular leader she's not about to declare war on another sovereign nation or have a spouse beheaded (although she's probably thought of both from time to time.