Miranda Rights and Terror Suspects (Hr 5)

In 4-6 Sentences write a proposal that you think the United States should adopt regarding when they should and should not use the Miranda rights with terrorist suspects. Include support for your proposal.

Once you have finished your proposal look over your classmates and comment on at least one.

I think that when it comes to terrorist suspects we need to gather information from them before we read them their miranda rights. The reason being that we can gather information from them so that we can use that to help protect us in the future. However none of the information should be used during their trial. This way we can gather information to protect ourselves yet still be fair by not using that information against the suspect.

In the case of terrorists being convicted, the Miranda Rights need to be read before a custodial interrogation. However, if the person starts spewing informating before/during detainment, the information can be used in court. All Miranda rights still apply.
I feel that this is completely fair, if, during the heat of the moment, an informal interrogation occurs before detainment.

I think they should not give the Miranda warnings until they feel they have gotten any dangerous information out of the suspect. If they don't get this information first then the group he worked for may have plans to do it again. When that is out of them, then they can read them their warnings. If they don't have any of this information or it cannot be gotten out of them, they must read them their rights and go on like that.

cgimse wrote:In the case of terrorists being convicted, the Miranda Rights need to be read before a custodial interrogation. However, if the person starts spewing informating before/during detainment, the information can be used in court. All Miranda rights still apply.
I feel that this is completely fair, if, during the heat of the moment, an informal interrogation occurs before detainment.

I agree with you that if they were to tell you information before you even started asking question you should be able to use that. The only problem with this is that it would be hard to tell when the person gave the information.

LoganH wrote:I think that when it comes to terrorist suspects we need to gather information from them before we read them their miranda rights. The reason being that we can gather information from them so that we can use that to help protect us in the future. However none of the information should be used during their trial. This way we can gather information to protect ourselves yet still be fair by not using that information against the suspect.

I agree with Logan because he basically said the same thing as me. We have the same viewpoint on this subject.

I believe that the United States law enforcers should be able to do what ever they need to do to protect public safety. Yes not treating a person properly is bad but when weighed with the expense of many lives and safety of those people should weigh more on the scale. Therefore if it is deemed necessary to not notify terrorist of rights then they shall not be required by law to do so, as they are protecting public safety.

I think that the US Constitution should only apply to US Citizens. I also think that suspects (terror suspects in this case) do not have to be read their Miranda Rights, that way they can try to obtain more information regarding terror threats. Although they do not have to be read, they should be read after the interrogation officer decides that they have gotten enough information regarding other terror threats. This would allow for room to get more info. but still give terrorist their rights as long as they are a US Citizen. If not, then the Miranda Rights do not need to be read.

I think that the Miranda Rights should be enforced at all times. If someone attempts an act of terrorism, They should be read there rights. If the rights were not read to them they could still use what they said against them in court. I don't think that the Miranda Rights should be read to a person that has blew up a building ETC because they already have enough proof

I think that Miranda rights should not have to be read to a terror suspect. I think that if someone is a suspect to terrorism then they have lost many of their rights. Police should do whatever they can to figure out what they need to know to protect people. If the police have the opportunity to save lives they should do whatever possible.

I think that they should wait to give the miranda warning to a terrorist suspect untill they gather enough information. After they have enough info then give the suspect their miranda warning. If they give the suspect their miranda warning before they have enough evidence then then might not get as much info out of the suspect.

LoganH wrote:I think that when it comes to terrorist suspects we need to gather information from them before we read them their miranda rights. The reason being that we can gather information from them so that we can use that to help protect us in the future. However none of the information should be used during their trial. This way we can gather information to protect ourselves yet still be fair by not using that information against the suspect.

OH YEAH you brought up good points!

LoganH wrote:I think that when it comes to terrorist suspects we need to gather information from them before we read them their miranda rights. The reason being that we can gather information from them so that we can use that to help protect us in the future. However none of the information should be used during their trial. This way we can gather information to protect ourselves yet still be fair by not using that information against the suspect.

I agree with Logan, that this is being fair to the terrorist, while protecting against future crimes. However I would just hope that this might not excuse the terrorist of all crimes so he might continue these illegal acts.

Jacob S. wrote:I believe that the United States law enforcers should be able to do what ever they need to do to protect public safety. Yes not treating a person properly is bad but when weighed with the expense of many lives and safety of those people should weigh more on the scale. Therefore if it is deemed necessary to not notify terrorist of rights then they shall not be required by law to do so, as they are protecting public safety.

I agree with Jacob. The US can and should take action to get info regarding more plots.

I think that we should never use the Miranda rights with someone that we think is a terrorist. If they have done something that was going or did kill someone r many people, they have no right to know their rights. Plus if there is going to be another attempt at a bombing or something we should let them talk and get it out of them to see what else they know or what other plans they have. If we were to read them the rights they would just sit there and they wouldn't talk.

When dealing with terrorists and Miranda rights the interrogation should be able to go as long as the cops need to get enough information to ensure the public safety. After they should be read there rights and what was confessed to can be used in court. This reason is so that if a terrorist is shutting up and wont explain where the bomb is for example he can't be told he can remain silent because he could blow up thousands of people and police would not be able to save lives.

When it comes to terrorist's they should read them the Miranda rights when they are going to ask them questions and not hold off. They shouldn't try to get information out of them before they read them their Miranda rights because if they get something useful out of them then they wont be able to use it in court. They shouldn't be read to them if they are just detaining them and not questioning them. It kind of goes along with the public safety because if they are going to harm someone then they should not be read their Miranda rights.

We should read Miranda Rights to U.S citizens or immigrants who are here legally. Terrorist are different matter though. Wither they are a U.S citizen or not- if they are suspected of terrorism, than there should be a different process of attaining information to prove a person is a terrorist. The rights should be read after investigators have figured out if there may be another bombing or attack, why they're dong what they are doing and so on. After that read the suspects their rights and get the evidence to charge them.

well..that was honestly just stupid

I think the United States should use Miranda Rights according to severity of the terrorist attack. If they need to interrogate the terrorist to protect the safety of public immediately, than fast action must be made. For example, if the police force need more information in order to prevent another terror attack than Miranda Rights should not be applied because the suspect may delay time by requesting a lawyer before being questioned. Time is important in these matters. If the suspect is detained and the terror activity is removed and all public is safe, than Miranda Rights should be used.

A proposal they should use is having all terrorists not given the miranda rights. this would help keep the country safe. if we put a high punishment up than it will perhaps lower the terrorism rate. And that is my view on this matter.

I think we should ask them a few questions to see if they let slip any information. If the person begins to say things that could be dangerous for the public's safety, then we should listen closely so we know how to protect ourselves. After we hear about what will happen so we can protect ourselves, we can then read them their rights. Even though the information can not be used in court, at least we saved ourselves from potentially getting hurt or killed.

RachaelButz wrote:well..that was honestly just stupid

I hope that's not your reply.

I think that they should not have to read them to anyone who is not a US citizen or if you are a threat to or terrorizing that you do not have to be read there Miranda rights. This will help us to be able to gather information to stop other attacks. But just being able to not have to tell them their Miranda rights they night not lawyer up and stop talking right away. When dealing with a threat you want to be able to get the most information and make the public safety safe as fast and easy as possible.

I think that the United States should read a terrorist suspect their Miranda rights but the timing doesn't matter. If the police are getting information out of the terror suspect then you don't want the terrorist to know he doesn't have to talk. If public safety is in danger then they can read them their Miranda rights after they interrogate the suspect.