To think that Harry and his kids should have security

Sure, they don't need it for the same reason but they're both high profile targets. I stand by my original point.

You shouldn't, it doesn't serve your argument well. If you think the four of them need 24/7 security as a matter of principle rather than fact based assessment, you'd be better off explaining why, rather than making a comparison to people who even you admit are very different. They're not ex PMs, they're the same as Charles' siblings and their kids were til lately.

Of course they should have whatever security they can afford themselves.

Why not? It is for them to decide.

Luckily, I'm a random person on Mumsnet and not on the committee that decides these things. Therefore, I don't have to explain why at all actually - I'm simply sharing my view. My view is that I'd rather pay for Harry than Liz. We can agree to disagree.

Obviously you are very free to make bad arguments with nothing to back them up if you want to.

I also think they should have security, I just dont think I as the taxpayer should have to fund it, I’d rather that money goes to schools, police, the nhs, I think they should have security and pay for it themselves. I don’t give a shit it’s not armed,their choice to live here, if they don’t like it they can fuck off back to America

Both on his book and their docuseries, they heavily implied that they want police security because of paparazzi. They want taxpayers funded security to slay the paparazzi dragon sent by their enemy the evil dailymail.

Image how you'd feel if you're doing the school run, been stuck for half an hour, and then along comes a convoy of nee-naws blue-lights-flashing-putting-on-the-speed forcing other cars to squeeze up (and further complicate the traffic jam.

Just so that the two kids of a non-working royal can get to school. Oh, and we are paying for the service.

That is what H wants. Talk about entitlement.

He's a republican's dream!

So, if I create a social media presence for my child, build them a global identity, and pay magazines to publish stories about them on a weekly basis, the child should get paid-for state protection?

An unusual number of reluctant-to-think people on this thread.

"I haven't given it much thought, but I think <blah blah blah>".

Any counter arguments or invitations to engage in, er, thinking about it are met with - I know what I think and that's what I think, so there! - or similar.

Maybe that’s the goal of If I can’t have the throne nobody can!!!

Could you imagine this back in the days of killing to be king 😬

Driving thought Northumberland earlier in the year I had the thought...

Back in the day H would have landed in Northumberland and rallied an army to move South. He'd have taken Oxford before Christmas, despite the traffic jams.

Because this thread is inviting our opinions. Obviously we don’t make the actual decision.

No. My opinion is based on the security privileges afforded to George, Charlotte and Louis.

I really think you need to get our more OP if this is the sort of shit keeping you awake at night.

but why? they aren't comparable. Just like Anne's children didn't get armed security..

Harry and family no doubt do have credible threats no doubt and they need security. Which they have.

but do they need 24 hour armed security provided by the state? the state dont; think so, and they know a bit more.

They aren't helping themselves by giving out their personal mobile numbers ... making it INCREDIBLY easy to find out what school their kids go to, not doing due diligence on routes, showing images of where they live, where they're going to be... etc

They until about a month ago were complaining how the family can't live in the uk... but weirdly moved here anyway, with big announcements and fuss. THey could have probalby quietly moved here and the general public would have been none the wiser for a fair amount of time. They got in and out of the UK in the summer with no fuss or bother...

They don't work for the government or the royal family, why should their security be paid for by either of those?

They're private citizens and should be paying for their own like other famous private citizens do.

Harry’s a plank.
he tells the world at every opportunity that he doesn’t have adequate protection yet can not see how this in itself creates a security risk.
must we fund protection for a person whom constantly risks his own security.
make it make sense please!

hope you pay for it then

I said think they should be provided with armed security. Nowhere did I say I 24/7 armed security.

I do think they are comparable to Wales’ children.

Info of their geographical location becoming available is moot. They can’t live in a black hole so it’s of no importance whether it’s known now or later.

I do think they are comparable to Wales’ children.

How? The Wales children take part in the public life of the nation, and as they get older will no doubt take part in public life in other Commonwealth countries.

The Sussex children do not. They are private citizens. That was the choice H&M made when they decided to step back from life as working royals.

But they are provided with armed security. When there is a real threat.

Just not whenever they feel like. When a threat level hits the armed guard level.

They are not on level with the wales children at all. The wales children dad will be king. One of those children will be king and the others siblings to the king.

The Sussex children are lower down the peaking order making them lower risk and will continue to go further down the list once the wales children marry and have children. Other royals and not just ours manage perfectly fine without all this hoohaa.

I don’t agree they are less at risk. It’s ok though, we can disagree.

Well .... The professionals with security intelligence don't think they are.

Why do you think they are?