Next thing you know we're gonna be extradited to Britain for insulting the queen.
I don't believe that's an offence in the UK. (Thailand has a law like that). Remember Parliament in the UK can despose and appoint a new monarch, so I doubt they'd make it a crime to insult the monarch.
Remember the Queen is part of a massive and powerful family that has helped run most of Europe for several hundred years, just because she is deemed a public image doesn't mean the family power would ever be replaced without considerable force.
Insulting of the Queen, called Lese-majesty, was only abolished in Scotland in 2010, it was prior to that a common law criminal offense, thought that last time it was ever prosecuted was in 1715.
ps. Also of note, offending the queen was the last step in the expulsion of Genesis P.Oridge (1980's?), when he and his cohorts mailed her their ejaculate.
The UK has a legal/constitutional system that appears, on the surface, to say one thing, but in reality says something else. On paper, de jure, the monarch has all the power, the parliament operates in their name, they appoint and dissolve the parliament, they sign all the laws, etc.
However in reality, parliament has all the power. The queen has no veto on laws, if they were to refuse to sign a law, they would have to resign (or there'd be a civil war). In theory the queen appoints the government and prime minister, but they must appoint the person who parliament has choose. In theory PM goes to the queen to dissolve parliament, but the queen cannot refuse. The monarch has mo power anymore is more of a formality.
And the Act of Settlement of 1700ish defines that only the protestant descendeds of Sophie of Hanover can be monarch. This is an example of Parliament defining who is (and more importantly for the Stuarts) who cannot be monarch.
I don't believe that's an offence in the UK. (Thailand has a law like that). Remember Parliament in the UK can despose and appoint a new monarch, so I doubt they'd make it a crime to insult the monarch.