U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:25 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,582 posts, read 8,311,877 times
Reputation: 4159

Advertisements

You know which ones I mean. You have the right to remain silent, you have a right to an attorney, etc. etc. and all the rest.

Of course, it's vitally necessary that accused persons have these rights, even the Boston Marathon Bomber slimeball, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Far too easy for the government to abuse people if we don't ALL have these rights.

But where does it say that, when a cop arrests you, he must suddenly turn into a schoolteacher and inform you of those rights?

If I'm going to drive a car, does some cop have to walk into my driveway before I leave, and inform me that it's illegal to run a stop sign, illegal to speed, illegal to turn left on a red light etc., so that if I later do one of those things I can't claim that I didn't know the law? No. In fact, the cops can simply assume I did know the law, and if I didn't, that's my tough luck. It is NOT their job to inform me of what the law says before I drive and possibly violate a law.

So why is it their job to inform a suspect of what the law says about his rights, when they arrest him?

It's certainly their job to respect his rights, and get him a lawyer if he wants one, and not press him if he doesn't want to answer their questions etc. etc. The Constitution is very clear on that, and again I wouldn't have it any other way. But I have yet to see the part of the Constitution that says it is their job to INFORM him of those rights.

People are yelling about how the cops didn't "Mirandize" the Boston bomber before asking questions. They claim some "public safety" exception, which I would imagine means that if there might be other bombs around waiting to go off, the cops don't have to waste time explaining his rights to him. But, I'm sure, they must RESPECT his rights: Quit questioning him if he doesn't want to answer, get him a lawyer etc.

But to the people screaming that they didn't EXPLAIN his rights to him, I say: So what? Where does the Constitution say they have to EXPLAIN them to him (or to any other suspect)?

I know, I know, the Miranda v. Arizona ruling says so, handed down by a Warren court notorious for inventing laws that never existed. But that doesn't answer my question.

Certainly any suspect must have those rights, no question, and the cops must obey them. But where does the Constitution say the cops must turn into schoolteachers and EXPLAIN them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:26 PM
 
6,156 posts, read 4,165,301 times
Reputation: 1513
It really doesn't matter.

If they don't mirandize you, all that means is that if you do subsequently talk, they can't use it against you in court.

There's plenty of evidence here, so who cares?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:28 PM
 
9,665 posts, read 8,692,140 times
Reputation: 3225
There are other federal laws besides the constitution, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:33 PM
 
910 posts, read 1,169,927 times
Reputation: 594
You don't have to be mirandized. All it means is if you aren't anything you say that might implicate you is inadmissible in trial. In cases where there's more than enough evidence to convict at the time of arrest there's no need to do it, since there's no need to force a confession. Miranda itself was upheld by Dickerson so it's settled law at this point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:33 PM
 
4,130 posts, read 3,868,867 times
Reputation: 3041
Where in the constitution does it say you can drive a car, have straight marriages, own a home, and own a computer? Nowhere.

The constitution was allowed to evolve with the times, like the founding fathers intended. It doesn't expressly give you all the rights you have, or don't have, in life while in the US. Doesn't mean I care if either of the bombers (alive or dead) were read them right after those firefights. The law doesn't state either in the cases in the constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:33 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,582 posts, read 8,311,877 times
Reputation: 4159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamBarrow View Post
It really doesn't matter.
It really does matter.

Cases have been lost, where the suspect was clearly guilty, because a cop didn't inform the suspect of his rights... even thoush those rights were scrupulously observed and held inviolate.

Slimeballs were released back out onto the street, maybe to assault, injure, and even kill more innocent people, basically for no good reason.

I suggest that that practice be stopped. Cops must certainly respect and obey the guy's rights. But they don't have to EXPLAIN them to him. And if he doesn't know his own most basic rights and voluntarily turns into a chatterbox, that's too damned bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Texas State Fair
8,566 posts, read 9,698,415 times
Reputation: 4230
Does the Constitution say the cops must READ YOU your Miranda rights?


The Volokh Conspiracy » Tsarnaev and Miranda Rights

Orin Kerr • April 20, 2013 2:18 am
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:35 PM
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
14,131 posts, read 27,164,366 times
Reputation: 6827
Like Roe v. Wade and Miranda, much constitutional law is the result of interpretation:

Miranda v. Arizona - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:42 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,582 posts, read 8,311,877 times
Reputation: 4159
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeraldCityWanderer View Post
Where in the constitution does it say you can drive a car, have straight marriages, own a home, and own a computer? Nowhere.
Irrelevant. The Const is a series of rules restricting GOVERNMENT (including the cops), not something granting citizens permissions they don't need in the first place.

Quote:
The constitution was allowed to evolve with the times,
No, the Constitution was VIOLATED by the Miranda v. Arizona ruling, in the ways I outlined in the OP, and not at all like the Framers intended.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2013, 09:46 PM
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
14,131 posts, read 27,164,366 times
Reputation: 6827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
No, the Constitution was VIOLATED by the Miranda v. Arizona ruling, in the ways I outlined in the OP, and not at all like the Framers intended.
The same framers who had no problem with bans on inter-racial marriage. I'm guessing you think Loving v. Virginia also VIOLATED the consitution?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top