Miranda v. Arizona The Miranda rights have continued to stay in the law enforcement system for many years now, but how they are read, and who they are read to is starting to be a conflict in today’s generation. Miranda rights have survived to this day, and revisions to the Miranda warning is being talked about based on who is listening and understanding their rights. The question of whether or not the way the Miranda warning is read should be changed is based on the targeted minors who do not understand what they are being read. Due to multiple cases when people were not protected against self incrimination, Miranda rights are read to protect suspects, and they will continue to be read so new generations are aware and understand the rights
…show more content…
The question of whether or not minors under the age of 18 should be treated differently when being read their rights has come up in the current news. There are differences between minors and adults, “Children are different from adults. The Supreme Court has in other contexts concluded that children cannot be viewed as "mini adults" under the law because they lack the maturity and foresight to understand the full consequences of their actions. The same holds true when they are considered suspects and are being questioned by law enforcement officers,”(“How Should Police Read…”). Due to the maturity level, minors may not understand what is being read to them through the Miranda Warning. Minors also interact differently with police officers or other government officials and it is, “...important step to ensure that minors are not intimidated or improperly manipulated into incriminating themselves,” (“Miranda Rights For Children?”). Because of the age difference between police officers and minors, and the reputation police officers have, it can cause the minor to incriminate themselves. Due to the fact that the Miranda Rights don’t specify what to do when minors are involved and need to be read their rights, an update would be a better way to make sure everyone is protected …show more content…
Back in 2000, the Miranda Rights were revised and looked over, but no changes were made due to the fact that a conflict did not arise before then causing the rights to be altered. There are ideas that people have to try and make sure that all are protected by these rights and to make sure they are being read. The idea, “One alternative made possible by evolving technology would be to require video recording of all in-custody police questioning - to deter abuses and to let juries decide if a confession was voluntary,” (Lane). Through technology, there is better prove if what police officers are doing is right, and if something should be changed to update the Miranda Warning so that the update could do what is best for everyone. Due to society always changing, and never knowing what the future holds, it is hard to update something when the question arises later if the update will help or hurt in the future. Chief Justice Earl Warren’s opinion, “It is impossible . . . to foresee the potential alternatives for protecting the privilege which might be devised by Congress or the States,” (Lane). This may be the thing causing the update to be postponed. Until a major case comes through involving the Miranda Rights needing an update, it might be held
The question of whether or not minors under the age of 18 should be treated differently when being read their rights has come up in the current news. There are differences between minors and adults, “Children are different from adults. The Supreme Court has in other contexts concluded that children cannot be viewed as "mini adults" under the law because they lack the maturity and foresight to understand the full consequences of their actions. The same holds true when they are considered suspects and are being questioned by law enforcement officers,”(“How Should Police Read…”). Due to the maturity level, minors may not understand what is being read to them through the Miranda Warning. Minors also interact differently with police officers or other government officials and it is, “...important step to ensure that minors are not intimidated or improperly manipulated into incriminating themselves,” (“Miranda Rights For Children?”). Because of the age difference between police officers and minors, and the reputation police officers have, it can cause the minor to incriminate themselves. Due to the fact that the Miranda Rights don’t specify what to do when minors are involved and need to be read their rights, an update would be a better way to make sure everyone is protected …show more content…
Back in 2000, the Miranda Rights were revised and looked over, but no changes were made due to the fact that a conflict did not arise before then causing the rights to be altered. There are ideas that people have to try and make sure that all are protected by these rights and to make sure they are being read. The idea, “One alternative made possible by evolving technology would be to require video recording of all in-custody police questioning - to deter abuses and to let juries decide if a confession was voluntary,” (Lane). Through technology, there is better prove if what police officers are doing is right, and if something should be changed to update the Miranda Warning so that the update could do what is best for everyone. Due to society always changing, and never knowing what the future holds, it is hard to update something when the question arises later if the update will help or hurt in the future. Chief Justice Earl Warren’s opinion, “It is impossible . . . to foresee the potential alternatives for protecting the privilege which might be devised by Congress or the States,” (Lane). This may be the thing causing the update to be postponed. Until a major case comes through involving the Miranda Rights needing an update, it might be held