3 ms·
Because one day it might be you who doesn't get read their rights.
by willurd 13y ago
Because one day it might be you who doesn't get read their rights.
- cema 13y agoNo, simply because it is the right thing to do. However, this case is in a gray area because Dzhokhar apparently was unconscious when taken into custody.
- willurd 13y agoI was answering the question as to whether he/she should care. If they don't already care, it's clear they have no regard for anyone else but themselves. I was giving them the selfish reason.
- cinquemb 13y agoAh, The Right Thing To Do™ I was expecting an invocation of a god or the State™ whims, but an appeal to some kind of morality not mentioned in relation to works just as well. /sarc
- willurd 13y agoIn this case you could make the argument that it's the right thing to do because it's (I'm assuming) what you would want done to yourself.
- cinquemb 13y agoYes, i'd gladly bend over and lubricate my own orifices for sacrifice to the State™ to tort its own laws in the hopes that in the future it will set a precedent for future generations to cope with more of the same :D /sarc
- willurd 13y agoYour sarcasm is duly noted, sir.
- cema 13y agoYou know, whatever works. If we agree it's a moral thing to do, the origin of the morality is less important. Philosophy can be debated... in a different thread.
- willurd 13y agoMorality is such a loaded word, which is why I didn't use it. But yes, another day, another thread.
- cinquemb 13y ago"whatever works." Well if the State™ has to circumvent it's own laws to achieve some ends (which i doubt are really ends since incidents like this will continue to happen), one could argue that grounds for morality are null and void. After all, that's what Terrorists™ do.
- glhaynes 13y agoJust FYI - the little ™ thing doesn't help your arguments be heard. Just the opposite. See also, people who write "Micro$oft".
- cinquemb 13y agoI recognize that, but i also recognize that people who are devout in their beliefs have little reason to think otherwise (it is a belief after all), so in the end i do it anyway for my own laughs :P
- ori_b 13y ago"Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will not hear his Miranda rights before the FBI questions him Friday night.". Unless they're questioning an unconcious person, there is no gray area.
- cema 13y agoHeh, a good catch. :-)
- misframer 13y agoAs long as you remember you still have those rights, it doesn't really matter?
- Dylan16807 13y agoYeah, this article and most comments seem pretty ridiculous.
- icelancer 13y agoYeah, let's just assume he knows all of his rights. Come on! It's on TV all the time and stuff. No reason to even bring them up. Now where did you buy those pressure cookers, hmm?
- willurd 13y agoNot everyone knows they have these rights. I remember in high school being told repeatedly that I had no rights as a minor. We never actually learned about our constitutional rights; I had to find those out on my own. Also, people have a natural tendency toward defending themselves after being accused. Being read your rights is a reminder, in the heat of the moment, that no, you don't have to talk and you have the right not to. And your right to remain silent is important even if you're not guilty (maybe especially!). Dont Talk to Police: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
- mpyne 13y agoIndividually, no. But the Miranda process isn't about the individual alone, it's about the whole system of law. But in this case, certainly they should ensure he doesn't die due to lack of medical attention while they attempt to read him his Miranda rights.
- SCAQTony 13y agoOnce he resumed consciousness he has a right to remain silent but the "public safety" exemption that the Supreme Court inserted to the Miranda rule in 1984 was changed even further by Obama in 2011 that allows the government to question a suspect for 48-hours. Is that a greased, slippery, slope or what? References: [1] Think Progress - http://goo.gl/DPV6L http://goo.gl/DPV6L [2] Wall Street Journal - http://goo.gl/fEPnO http://goo.gl/fEPnO
- singlow 13y agoThe Miranda rights are not the right to be read the Miranda recitation, although Miranda did involve that requirement. He actually will not have the right to remain silent. It may mean that his statements are not admissible, but it also means that the interrogators will not leave him alone if he asks for a lawyer or provide a lawyer during questioning. He cannot invoke his Miranda rights even if he knows them.
- gareim 13y agoNo, you're wrong. He has the right to remain silent and the right to counsel; the article even mentions that. The right to remain silent and right the counsel are built into the Constitution and can't be waived so easily just because the FBI decide they want to. What they can do, as determined by a few courts, is not remind the suspect of those rights in situations where the FBI believe they need information for public safety.