Miranda rights: say what? 0
Okay, in keeping with the “let’s educate the Canadians about America” theme I’ve been developing since last week (thanks TV!), how many Canadians have heard of, but not known what are, Miranda Rights?
“Ernesto Miranda had confessed to rape and kidnapping after two hours of interrogation, and the appeal to the Supreme Court alleged that Miranda was not aware of his rights to remain silent (the Fifth Amendment) and to counsel (the Sixth Amendment). The Court ruled in favor of Miranda, and the decision instituted what we’ve come to know as the “Miranda Rights.” To safeguard against a suspect falling into an involuntary confession because he thinks he has no choice but to speak, the police must expressly, clearly and completely advise any suspect of his rights to silence and counsel before beginning an interrogation or any other attempt to get a statement from a suspect. The Miranda decision attempts to eliminate suspect ignorance as a contributing factor to involuntary confessions.”
I was thinking about this in terms of privacy: I call the RBC and apply for a new service. They then proceed to say “answer yes or no to the following questions” and proceed to read me, for all intents and purposes, my “rights” to privacy.
I despiste this manner of informing people. I think the Miranda Rights is better than forcefully compelling somone who wishes to secure service to say “yes” to a series of hard-to-understand questions.
Granted, you can’t tell someone in person to “refer to your rights at the bottom of the page”. But there has to be a better way to communicate rights orally. The Miranda way seems to be one way to go about it.
“You have the right to personal privacy. We will not sell or trade with your personal information. We will not share this with any outside party except as required by law. Do you understand these personal privacy rights?”
Sumpn’ like that.