Why on Earth does this law exist? 'You don't have to answer that question if you think it will help us discover that you are indeed the horrible git we think you are, just so you know'. It seems perverse to me, and I haven't read anything that indicates it is supposed to protect people against wrongful conviction, only that the idea is people shouldn't feel obliged to say things that will get them in trouble. What sort of society is that supposed to foster?
The right not to self-incriminate is an absolutely essential one if you value not living in a police state. Having the legal duty to self-incriminate would effectively cancel presumption of innocence and shift the burden of proof from the prosecution onto the defense.Why on Earth does this law exist? .... What sort of society is that supposed to foster?
Yes, well this maybe nitpicking, but that doesn't make the US SC more powerful than its German, Italian or Czech counterparts. They all have these powers. The "only difference" is that the American political system is less flexible and America hasn't had a revolution since at least 1865, or possibly never even had one. Lots of civil rights in Europe came about as a result of a revolution or even several (most of continental Europe), a credible threat of one (UK). America wasn't devastated by two world wars, it avoided a dictatorship during the Great Depression. There wasn't really any massive systemic and institutional failure, where they would just start from a scratch with a fresh new ideology, consitution and lessons what to avoid in the future etc. America has always worked well enough to make a large part of its population think that no change is really needed.I think the "making **** up" shows exactly how much power the court has. To interpret laws almost at random.
The 1966 case of "rights of suspects against self-incrimination" was decided 5-4. It could have gone either way, but is now so fundamental it's the first thing a person is told when arrested.
It also seems absurd that it requires a supreme court ruling to establish the "right to counsel" e.g.
Abortion is another absurdity. To my knowledge there are no recent amendments mentioning this. So 'ancient scriptures' - back when abortion was not a medical option - are interpreted by 9 people instead of the democratically elected politicians.
Ah, I see peace hasn't intensified in your country and city yet.It's scary to see Trump not condemning idiot militias with guns marching on protests
Not much else to do anyway. I'll probably get a cabin or something in the woods upstate for the election day, because I have zero faith in my fellow "mostly peaceful" New Yorkers if Trump refuses to concede, or heaven forbid, wins.Aren't you on the wrong end of the Atlantic to be looking for entertainment?
I feel that you are grasping at straws here. Democrats have condemned violence in protests more than once, Trump has refused to condemn extreme right wing violence once. Anything else than a win for him will automatically be treated as fraud, and then all the "very fine people" such as Proud Boys will get the green light to "**** them up" (their words, not mine).Ah, I see peace hasn't intensified in your country and city yet.
Not much else to do anyway. I'll probably get a cabin or something in the woods upstate for the election day, because I have zero faith in my fellow "mostly peaceful" New Yorkers if Trump refuses to concede, or heaven forbid, wins.
What is your source for this? Because everything I can find points to extreme right wing groups as a serious terrorist threat that is doing real damage, while left wing groups are not considered much of a threat.The Democratic powers that be in Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, New York and possibly elsewhere actively pandered to BLM and their fellow travelers as the latter were burning those cities causing damage upwards of 1 billion dollars, innumerable assaults, and at least 5 murders that I can think of.
The militias are responsible for no property damage that I know if and between 0 and 1 murder, depending on how the investigation turns out.
Biden and everyone else can take their vague condemnations of abstract violence and shove it. They did nothing to prevent it, stop it and attacked everyone who called on them to do so.
Trump is better in this regard by only the tiniest of margins. What the ****, Eisenhower federalized the National Guard and sent them to desegregate a school, but mass-scale violence only warrants sanctimonious tweets.
Ah, I see peace hasn't intensified in your country and city yet.
at least 5 murders that I can think of.
this isn't a double standard at all lmaobetween 0 and 1 murder, depending on how the investigation turns out.