Hacker News Reader

Comment by willurd | Hacker News Reader

Because one day it might be you who doesn't get read their rights.

The 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.

No, 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.

No, 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.

I 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.

Ah, 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

In 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.

Yes, 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

Your sarcasm is duly noted, sir.

You 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.

Morality is such a loaded word, which is why I didn't use it. But yes, another day, another thread.

"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.

Just FYI - the little ™ thing doesn't help your arguments be heard. Just the opposite. See also, people who write "Micro$oft".

I 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

"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.

Heh, a good catch. :-)

As long as you remember you still have those rights, it doesn't really matter?

Yeah, this article and most comments seem pretty ridiculous.

Yeah, 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?

Not 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

Individually, 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.

Once 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 [2] Wall Street Journal - http://goo.gl/fEPnO

Reply on news.ycombinator.com