I assume that most people who post here are smarter than the average citizen or at least more informed. The real "spaghetti code" problem here is that this obsc

I assume that most people who post here are smarter than the average citizen or at least more informed. The real "spaghetti code" problem here is that this obscure statute can easily be violated in advance of being told your rights. And you only get ready your rights a.k.a. mirandized when you're bordering on already in trouble with the law. Coupled with the fact that this is a federal statute it only applies to federal agents not city or state. And since you can lie to city or state officials up until you are under oath (which most people know) you might be inclined to believe he can do it to federal agent until it's too late. Which means their first encounter with a federal agent will be a crash course in the finer points of the law. One which they will unlikely be able to walk away from. I believe the spirit of v. Miranda is being violated the statute, I believe the beginning of any contacts with the law enforcement official should begin with the reading of your rights which should now include information on statute 18 sec 1001.