Should USAmerican ambassador be ASBO'd?

Morally; yes, I think. Obviously, under the Geneva Convention legally; no. Here's why I think Boris Johnson, like Ken Livingstone before him, is right to insist that diplomats pay the congestion charge. Boris said 'The Swiss typically have come forward with trying to broker some kind of deal, I'm very keen that whatever deal we do should reflect the fact that these people are using London's roads. This is not a tax, this is a charge for the use of our roads, and I believe the diplomatic community should have the decency to pay it. I intend to stick to that decision.'
To make an analogy, which I think is just; I assume that the embassies pay for their power, sewerage, water, food, and so on, just like anyone else, so a charge for road use like everyone else is fair. I suppose the reason for resisting might be that it could be argued that it is a tax, which diplomats are exempt from. Just shows you how important naming things is, sometimes. If it's named a tax then it keeps company with various other calls on finance that diplomats may ignore. If it's a charge then it keeps company (has a paradigmatic relation to) with calls on money which everyone must pay. However we should note that within the UK system this is not a road tax; that is paid differently. No it's a charge, levied for use. If a diplomat wants to avoid it they should walk, cycle or take public transport (and they'd pay the charges for that too!).
Diplomats deserve asbo for London congestion charge snub, says Boris Johnson | Politics | guardian.co.uk: