Miranda-rama
by Liz Nevis
Supreme Court Justice Scalia, in his dissent in US v. Dickerson, proposed that we don’t need Miranda warnings anymore, because now most people know what their rights are when they’re arrested, and continuing to require Miranda warnings only protects the stupid. I respectfully beg to differ:
Numero uno: The only reason so may people know their Miranda rights now is that the reading of them is such a routine part of police procedure that all modern crime novels, TV shows, and movies depict their police-officer characters reading people those rights. If the real police stopped reading them to people they arrested, so would the fictional ones, and pretty soon people would forget.
Numero two-o:[1]
Isn’t protecting stupid people one of the mainstay policies of
Even the smartest people sometimes don’t think through the consequences of what they do. I think, if anything, we need MORE Miranda-style warnings to remind people of the consequences in other situations. For instance:
At a wedding reception: “You have the right to remain sober. 90% of the people here have video cameras, and anything silly you do while drunk can and will end up on the Worldwide Web or in an embarrassing-amateur-video-based TV show’s in-box by tomorrow morning.”
In a city real-estate agent’s office: “You have the right to move into an ‘exciting’ neighborhood with lots of nightclubs, art studios, etc. However, any objectionable noises, smells, and sights associated with these establishments can and will persist after you move in, generally at all hours. If you can’t handle that, consider moving to the suburbs instead.”
In a suburban real-estate agent’s office: “You have the right to live in a humongous honkin’ house, each of whose outer walls are an inch from the property line. However, anything you say or do near an uncovered window can and will be noticed and commented on by your neighbors whose houses are similarly situated. If you do not have curtains, or if they are the wrong color, the Homeowners’ Association will stop by for a chat with you very soon.”
In a high-school girls’ locker room: “You have the right to do, or not do, anything you want on a date. However, no matter what you do or do not do, your date can and will tell all his pals any made-up story he chooses afterward, and they will believe him.”
In a high-school boys’ locker room: “You have the right to ask the girl of your choice for a date. However, no matter how you do so, all her friends can and will burst into uncontrollable laughter whenever you walk by for at least a month.”
In a postgraduate school
admissions office: “You have the
right to pursue more education than is good for anyone’s mental health. After a couple of months with us, anything
you say will be incomprehensible to anyone lacking an exactly identical
academic background. You will eventually
have a right to foist your neuroses and psychoses on those of lesser or equal
learning. If you do not currently have a neurosis or psychosis, one will be
provided for you here.
[1]I borrowed this expression from drive-in movie reviewer Joe Bob Briggs, but I’m citing him, so it’s OK.