View Poll Results: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

Voters
47. You may not vote on this poll
  • It's fine, and warranted

    7 14.89%
  • It's BS, and shouldn't ever be done

    32 68.09%
  • I'm somewhere in the middle on this one

    6 12.77%
  • Other (please explain)

    2 4.26%
Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 105

Thread: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

  1. #11
    Fourum Addmean
    shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Land of the sodomizers
    Last Seen
    03-18-16 @ 09:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,758

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Aren't most individuals familiar enough with the Miranda rights already?
    Either I'm right or you're wrong.

  2. #12
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    I'm ambivalent.

    On the one hand, I don't think he should be read his rights because should he choose to stay silent after having them read to him, he might not offer information about other explosives or attacks or accomplices that could improve public safety (if such explosives, attacks or accomplices even exist).

    On the other hand, I want our system to maintain its integrity at all times even when the "suspects" are clearly guilty. Given that the FBI will probably ask him questions that aren't necessary for public safety, I find it troubling that we would compromise that integrity of our system simply because we can and we want to.

    That said, he seems like an educated, bright guy who probably knows he can stay silent or ask for a lawyer or whatever so it probably wouldn't matter either way.

    I don't know.

  3. #13
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    1. That's a slur.

    2. No lawyer is going to get anybody off. The public safety exception to Miranda is perfectly legal.
    Has it ever been ruled on by SCOTUS? If not, we have no idea whether it's "perfectly legal" or not.

    And to the poster above: it means they don't have to Mirandize him and whatever he says can be used at trial against him.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  4. #14
    Educator Schutzengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Last Seen
    04-20-13 @ 11:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    719

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Any lawyer worth his salt should be able to take his arrest and the tweet and show that he was arrested and detained improperly and not only use it to overturn any conviction but to also sue the arresting agency for civil rights violations.
    History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid. - Ike

    Tea is better for you than Kool-Aid.

  5. #15
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Feds Make Miranda Rights Exception for Marathon Bombing Suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev - ABC News

    I'm feeling pretty confident that we got the right guy. But, as someone who believes that the integrity of the overall system is more important than any single incident and/or suspect, I have issues with not reading the guy his Miranda warning. One, as he is in custody, I'm failing to see any scenario where he continues to pose any threat to public safety that would trigger this, and two, it smacks of yet another end-run around the Constitution using fear and emotion as the rationalization.
    As far as I know there is nothing in the constitution that says you have to be reminded of your constitutional rights when you get arrested.I really don't think a 10 or 20 second reminder of your rights is going to make much a difference or make people fully understand exactly what those rights means. If it did then no one would talk to the cops and there would be a lot less people in prison.

    As far as I am concerned knowing and understanding your constitutional rights and knowing the intent of those amendments' authors should be a mandatory subject in school.It should be just as much important as the three R's.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  6. #16
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,575

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Feds Make Miranda Rights Exception for Marathon Bombing Suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev - ABC News

    I'm feeling pretty confident that we got the right guy. But, as someone who believes that the integrity of the overall system is more important than any single incident and/or suspect, I have issues with not reading the guy his Miranda warning. One, as he is in custody, I'm failing to see any scenario where he continues to pose any threat to public safety that would trigger this, and two, it smacks of yet another end-run around the Constitution using fear and emotion as the rationalization.
    In my opinion there should never be an exception for this. It's not like he can't be quiet if he wasn't read his rights. There is absolutely no reason, even with a "ticking bomb" (which this isn't the case) that a citizen shouldn't be read their rights.

    We have more than enough evidence to put this guy away, why was this necessary?
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  7. #17
    Sage
    soccerboy22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    A warm place
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    10,723

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Should have just read him his rights. Don't want to screw up anything in his conviction.

  8. #18
    Educator Schutzengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Last Seen
    04-20-13 @ 11:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    719

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Has it ever been ruled on by SCOTUS? If not, we have no idea whether it's "perfectly legal" or not.

    And to the poster above: it means they don't have to Mirandize him and whatever he says can be used at trial against him.
    Miranda V Arizona... SCOTUS 5:4 Miranda v. Arizona - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    This is why we read people their rights, so yes it has been before the SCOTUS.
    History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid. - Ike

    Tea is better for you than Kool-Aid.

  9. #19
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by Schutzengel View Post
    Miranda V Arizona... SCOTUS 5:4 Miranda v. Arizona - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    This is why we read people their rights, so yes it has been before the SCOTUS.
    Where does your link show that SCOTUS ruled on not Mirandizing people? You know, what the thread's about.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  10. #20
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:06 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,413

    Re: No Miranda reading: Good or bad idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    As far as I know there is nothing in the constitution that says you have to be reminded of your constitutional rights when you get arrested.I really don't think a 10 or 20 second reminder of your rights is going to make much a difference or make people fully understand exactly what those rights means. If it did then no one would talk to the cops and there would be a lot less people in prison.
    The Constitution, even as the supreme law of the land, isn't the "be all and end all", either.

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    In my opinion there should never be an exception for this. It's not like he can't be quiet if he wasn't read his rights. There is absolutely no reason, even with a "ticking bomb" (which this isn't the case) that a citizen shouldn't be read their rights.

    We have more than enough evidence to put this guy away, why was this necessary?
    To me it almost comes off as grandstanding by the government. Sort of a reassuring, "We'll act fast and take care of you." kind of thing.

    As someone else mentioned, I want all the i's dotted and all the t's crossed. I suspect that any motion to suppress evidence over this will be denied, but I don't want that motion being brought in the first place.


    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Where does your link show that SCOTUS ruled on not Mirandizing people? You know, what the thread's about.
    I heard on the news last night that this particular exemption has been approved by the SC, but I only heard it said once and I don't have a link to verify.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •