Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And you have no right to devoid him of his rights. I agree, but just like any other citizen, he has the right to due process. If we start taking away the rights of the worst, what is to stop them from taking away the rights of all the rest of us whenever they choose, using it to arrest/convict "enemies of the state'' I know how you feel, and I more than anyone would have liked to have seen him hung from the highest tree, but we have to keep emotions out of it as to protect the rights of all of us. They once asked Robert Shapiro if he thought O.J. was guilty, he paused and said, "Sometimes the guilty have to go free to protect the innocent" I understood what he meant, it was about protecting all of our rights.
no one is denying him due process..
Once again, there are lots of people in jail who have never been mirandized. For example, those arrested for DUI, go to trial but ARE NOT QUESTIONED.
The other poster didnt say they dont apply, he said he didnt care.
This applies how? My post is to the OP.
Here is the simple fact, which will **** off most people who read this. MOST of you have no clue what Miranda is, isn't, what is required and, more importantly, what ISN'T required. MOST of you get your information from cop shows, internet rumor/gossip, and "its common knowledge." Very few of you, if any, have any real understanding of the law and how its applied.
YET, you believe you some sort of "right" to apply it on others, when you have no clue what it is you are talking about.
And you have no right to devoid him of his rights. I agree, but just like any other citizen, he has the right to due process. If we start taking away the rights of the worst, what is to stop them from taking away the rights of all the rest of us whenever they choose, using it to arrest/convict "enemies of the state'' I know how you feel, and I more than anyone would have liked to have seen him hung from the highest tree, but we have to keep emotions out of it as to protect the rights of all of us. They once asked Robert Shapiro if he thought O.J. was guilty, he paused and said, "Sometimes the guilty have to go free to protect the innocent" I understood what he meant, it was about protecting all of our rights.
Many don't see it that way. They are looking at this as a singular event.
Probably the same group that had no issues with the assassination of Al-Awalki.
this is not grass cutting. this is being able to use what a person says durring interrogation agasint him.
If you dont know the perticular statute, thats OK...but act as if you understand what I asking..
I not only knew what the hell you were asking, but I listed FOUR Supreme Court rulings on the matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimuelojones
Cutting grass and use of one's testimony durring interogation against them are not equal.
DING DING DING.. You stand here and argue with me while then responding back with the exact same thing I said.
Who is using the testimony against him? As long as they DONT USE IT AGAINST HIM, then they dont need to miranidze him..
Once again, there are lots of people in jail who have never been mirandized. For example, those arrested for DUI, go to trial but ARE NOT QUESTIONED.
Correct, you do not have to be given Miranda rights, unless they interrogate you , and I am sure he will be interrogated and given his rights at that time.
Here is the simple fact, which will **** off most people who read this. MOST of you have no clue what Miranda is, isn't, what is required and, more importantly, what ISN'T required. MOST of you get your information from cop shows, internet rumor/gossip, and "its common knowledge." Very few of you, if any, have any real understanding of the law and how its applied.
YET, you believe you some sort of "right" to apply it on others, when you have no clue what it is you are talking about.
Oh please.. I posted Supreme Court rulings showing how most of these people are incorrect. I'm pretty sure Supreme Court rulings arent tv shows, maybe you can tell me what channel they are on..
I simply said the other poster said he didnt care.
By selecting the Boston Marathon on Patriot's Day as the occasion to target a mass murder of American citizens. The words "hate crime" come into play when it's a minority or gays who are targeted. Seems like the definition applies here when the victims are categorized.
I wasn't asking of how a determination of hate crime would be determined...I was asking, was how did you come to your dermination?
This determination:
Quote:
I'm a strong Constitutionalist, but in cases such as this, where there is not just criminal behavior but behavior which proves a strong hatred and war against not just citizens but against America itself, I feel this man has no rights.
You just wanted a chance to get in your "the givernment is out to get you" meme.
And you're a fool if you think they will never try to get you, we cannot give them any leeway. It is why we fought the revolutionary war.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
