It's fine, and warranted
It's BS, and shouldn't ever be done
I'm somewhere in the middle on this one
Other (please explain)
If, when defending your support for Donald Trump, and your response is,
"But but but... HILLARY!!!", then you lost the argument before you even began.
"If I take death into my life, acknowledge it, and face it squarely, I will free myself from the anxiety of death and the pettiness of life - and only then will I be free to become myself." ~ Martin Heidegger
It seems to me that if you're going to violate someone's basic civil rights in order to extract information from them that you believe you must have in order to avert a crisis, you should accept that everything you obtain from them is inadmissible in court.
I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.
Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.
New York v. Quarles - 467 U.S. 649 (1984)
New York v. Quarles - 467 U.S. 649 (1984) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center
Or you can read what the FBI says about it.
The "Public Safety" Exception to Miranda
I personally think the reasoning is wrong, in that, they can question all they want for their own or public safety they just shouldn't be able to use anything against the individual.
I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.
I can almost guarantee this guy already knows his rights. The only bearing this has on the situation is that anything he says during interrogation is inadmissable if he can prove he wasn't aware of his right to remain silent and speak to a lawyer. It's a gamble but I agree with not reading him his rights. If for whatever reason he isn't aware that he can stay silent and gives up information on other bombs and other threats to civilians then it would've been worth it. If he wasn't read his rights and he stayed silent anyway then oh well. As many have said before me, there is more than enough evidence to convict him anyway.
First, Miranda rights are not read to a suspect upon arrest. That's only on TV. In reality, they must be read before a suspect is interrogated, before the police ask them any questions. They can put a suspect in the back of the car and not say anything, and if the suspect talks, that information can be used as trial. They didn't have to tell the suspect about the right to remain silent. But once the cops start asking questions, then they must inform the suspect of that right.
The facts about Tsarnaev's interrogation are extremely limited, so I don't even know if there are any circumstances that warrant the public safety exception. Once he's safely in custody, what possible public dangers could exist? The only thing I can think of is to ask him "are there other bombs out there?" Which they should ask. And hopefully he would answer. But then they can't use those bombs as evidence. But they really shouldn't need to!!
The public safety exception comes from a supreme court case in 1980, and it is utter crap. It was more of the modern court's relentless drive to gut amendments four through eight. There was no real basis for the decision. It was arbitrary and they simply decided to create an exception. And it is an easily exploitable one. All a cop has to do is suspect public danger and Miranda flies out the window. It's astoundingly subjective and opens the door to a lot of potential abuse. Being dangerous (or rather, being accused of being dangerous) does not deprive a person of their fifth amendment rights.
This is a terrible precedent to set.
Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.
“Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson
Greatness lies not in being strong, but in the right use of strength - Henry Ward Beecher
Baby sister, I was born game and I intend to go out that way - Rooster Cogburn