Is it a citizen's duty to know their rights, or should they be informed by police?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Should people be informed of their right to refuse a vehicle search?


    • Total voters
      0

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    I got to thinking a bit on a recent discussion about traffic stops and police trying to fish for reasons to search the car, lacking any reasons whatsoever besides the moving violation or equipment malfunction.

    Somebody said something to the effect that "if people are too dumb to know their rights" then it is not the fault of police. Okay, fine.

    It is a fact that not everyone knows their rights. Heck, a fair amount of police officers don't even know what is contained in the Bill of Rights. And the public at large is getting a pretty minuscule understanding of the constitution. I am quite sure that many people do not realize that they have the right to REFUSE a vehicle search during a traffic stop. As officers have said, if they already had Probable Cause, they WOULD NOT BE ASKING.

    So -- why not "Mirandize" people with their rights regarding search and seizure?
    You have the right to refuse this search. If you consent to this search, anything found within your vehicle can and will be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand these rights? May I search your vehicle, citizen?

     

    E5RANGER375

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Feb 22, 2010
    11,507
    38
    BOATS n' HO's, Indy East
    YES! YES! YES! YES! great poll. If I were a govt teacher, I would tell every child in my class exactly what their rights are, and why they should NEVER open their mouths and talk to the police. maybe i'll go substitute teach for a while.
     

    Keyser Soze

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 29, 2010
    678
    16
    Miranda only applies Police custody police interrogation. Something like this already exist its called the Pirtle warning (pirtle vs state)

    1. You have the right to require a search warrant be obtained before any search of your residence vehicle or other premises.
    2. You have the right to refuse to consent to any such search.
    3. You have the right to consult with an attorney prior to giving consent to any such search.
    4. If you cannot afford a layer you have the right to have one provided at no cost.

    Do you understand these rights?

    Bearing these rights in mind are you willing to permit a complete search of your vehicle.

    We already have a duty to inform someone of their rights to get consent when they are IN POLICE CUSTODY.
     
    Last edited:

    RichardR

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 21, 2010
    1,764
    36
    If I were ever elected POTUS (President of the United States), my first EO (executive order) would be to use the public broadcast system to "interrupt everyone's regularly scheduled programing" on every single radio station & television channel for the first 24 hours of my administration, in order to inform/educate every citizen of what their Constitutional rights are.

    But then again my administration's main priority would be the full & complete restoration of our Constitution's original intent, which would be very hard to do without that sort of public broadcast because the Constitution's authority has been slowly corrupted & purposely misinterpreted for the last 150 years..
     

    Keyser Soze

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 29, 2010
    678
    16
    If I were ever elected POTUS (President of the United States), my first EO (executive order) would be to use the public broadcast system to "interrupt everyone's regularly scheduled programing" on every single radio station & television channel for the first 24 hours of my administration, in order to inform/educate every citizen of what their Constitutional rights are.

    But then again my administration's main priority would be the full & complete restoration of our Constitution's original intent, which would be very hard to do without that sort of public broadcast because the Constitution's authority has been slowly corrupted & purposely misinterpreted for the last 150 years..


    Richard....Do not do it during Greys anatomy ok?

    Really though I wonder how affective that would be. I doubt anyone would look up from their blackberry or iphone. I would halt all immigration and go back to a gold standard.
     

    Que

    Meekness ≠ Weakness
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 98%
    48   1   0
    Feb 20, 2009
    16,373
    83
    Blacksburg
    YES! YES! YES! YES! great poll. If I were a govt teacher, I would tell every child in my class exactly what their rights are, and why they should NEVER open their mouths and talk to the police. maybe i'll go substitute teach for a while.

    Ranger, please let me know what district you will be in, just in case I have to get my kids out. :D Kidding aside, this is a great suggestion. :yesway:

    OP, I was informed by my father of my rights as the age of 16, so I knew what my rights were if I was pulled over. However, I wouldn't mind a requirement that police have to inform me of my rights and that I can refuse a search.
     

    RichardR

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 21, 2010
    1,764
    36
    Richard....Do not do it during Greys anatomy ok?

    Really though I wonder how affective that would be. I doubt anyone would look up from their blackberry or iphone. I would halt all immigration and go back to a gold standard.

    *shrug* I personally think that if everyone (civilians, legislators, judges & LEO's) were aware of exactly what everyone's Constitutional rights were that it'd have a pretty big impact & we'd probably see a huge reduction in those rights being both knowingly & unknowingly violated.
     

    grimor

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 22, 2010
    1,111
    36
    Elkhart
    Seems most times I've had a cop tell me something they were way off. If they don't know your rights (or don't care about your rights) why would you want them to tell you their version of your rights?
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    Seems most times I've had a cop tell me something they were way off. If they don't know your rights (or don't care about your rights) why would you want them to tell you their version of your rights?

    If it followed the Miranda precedent, it would be more or less recited.

    And my wholehearted opinion is that any cop who doesn't know (or doesn't care!?) about a citizen's rights should have his badge taken from him. He swore an oath to protect our rights. He needs to know and understand that oath as a condition of his employment. Otherwise there are going to be citizens getting violated and Million-dollar lawsuits hitting up the taxpayers -- because some idiot wasn't fit to understand his oath.
     

    jsharmon7

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    119   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    7,821
    113
    Freedonia
    I don't need this nanny state government of ours holding my hand by forcing cops to explain my rights to me. I'm so sick of the government trying to protect me from myself! If I don't want to protect myself by knowing my own rights, then that's my business.
     

    dross

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2009
    8,699
    48
    Monument, CO
    I think the concept of Miranda, and any additions to it, are a symptom of the actual problem.

    In my ideal world, which of course does not exist, the police would have NO duty to inform anyone of their rights. It's the citizen's responsibility to know and assert his rights.

    The problem with my ideals in this real world in which we live, is that too much power has swung to the side of the police. If a cop who was found to actually violate my rights was in very serious trouble, being fired just the least of what would happen to him, then I think my world would work. As a citizen, I would assert my rights, and the cop would need to be absolutely sure he was on solid ground. If he were to search my vehicle and found later to be wrong, he would be dismissed. Zero tolerance for mistakes upon violating fundamental rights, and enumerated rights would be especially enforced.

    If it was discovered he violated my rights KNOWINGLY, or he used violence and it was covered up, not only should he be fired, but he should be put in jail for twice the sentence of a regular citizen.

    This would shift the balance of power to make sure that the officer wasn't rewarded for pushing the line in enforcement, but rather for using the utmost discretion.

    But, since we live in a world where we'll never go back, I'll reluctantly go along with the cops having to inform about more of our rights.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    I think the concept of Miranda, and any additions to it, are a symptom of the actual problem.

    In my ideal world, which of course does not exist, the police would have NO duty to inform anyone of their rights. It's the citizen's responsibility to know and assert his rights.

    The problem with my ideals in this real world in which we live, is that too much power has swung to the side of the police. If a cop who was found to actually violate my rights was in very serious trouble, being fired just the least of what would happen to him, then I think my world would work. As a citizen, I would assert my rights, and the cop would need to be absolutely sure he was on solid ground. If he were to search my vehicle and found later to be wrong, he would be dismissed. Zero tolerance for mistakes upon violating fundamental rights, and enumerated rights would be especially enforced.

    If it was discovered he violated my rights KNOWINGLY, or he used violence and it was covered up, not only should he be fired, but he should be put in jail for twice the sentence of a regular citizen.

    This would shift the balance of power to make sure that the officer wasn't rewarded for pushing the line in enforcement, but rather for using the utmost discretion.

    But, since we live in a world where we'll never go back, I'll reluctantly go along with the cops having to inform about more of our rights.

    Dross, I essentially agree with you as well. Violations of rights are happening on a daily basis and are considered a routine part of the job in this sick day and age. I've debated here before the concept of criminal punishment for violators of civilian rights, as well as expressing desire to repeal the laws that facilitate the regular violation of people's rights (such as arbitrary bans & prohibition on harmless behavior). Since those things aren't happening, here's another of my ideas that I wanted feedback on. I appreciate everyone's input.

    I am very curious why people voted "No," and look forward to a defense of that position. Do cops begrudge the fact that they have to inform of the right to remain silent?
     

    jsharmon7

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    119   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    7,821
    113
    Freedonia
    Dross, I essentially agree with you as well. Violations of rights are happening on a daily basis and are considered a routine part of the job in this sick day and age. I've debated here before the concept of criminal punishment for violators of civilian rights, as well as expressing desire to repeal the laws that facilitate the regular violation of people's rights (such as arbitrary bans & prohibition on harmless behavior). Since those things aren't happening, here's another of my ideas that I wanted feedback on. I appreciate everyone's input.

    I am very curious why people voted "No," and look forward to a defense of that position. Do cops begrudge the fact that they have to inform of the right to remain silent?

    Begrudge the requirement to inform someone of their right to remain silent? No, I just believe in personal responsibility. Why should it be a police officer's duty to teach people about their rights? When someone turns 18, should the government be required to explain the 2nd Amendment to them? What else should the government be required to educate people about? If the suspect is overweight should the police also lecture them about proper diet and exercise? If they smoke cigarettes, should the police have to explain the dangers of tobacco use? If people are too lazy/ignorant to know about their basic rights as a U.S. citizen then that's their lack of effort.
     

    CVMA544

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Sep 26, 2010
    378
    16
    SW Indiana
    Seems most times I've had a cop tell me something they were way off. If they don't know your rights (or don't care about your rights) why would you want them to tell you their version of your rights?

    With the Pirtle and Miranda warnings they are usually supplied card with the exact verbage to read to a suspect.

    They don't have to read the exact verbage but had better get every point across as if not it brings up legal issues and point for an appeal.

    The same with Implied Consent for DUI.
     

    Expat

    Pdub
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    23   0   0
    Feb 27, 2010
    108,731
    113
    Michiana
    I voted No. It is up to each citizen to educate himself on his rights and then assert them at the appropriate time. Just like I enjoy reading about the Darwin award winners, if someone is so stupid as to agree to a search of his vehicle that is full of illegal contraband, then I hope he gets arrested and thrown in prison.
     

    dross

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2009
    8,699
    48
    Monument, CO
    I voted No. It is up to each citizen to educate himself on his rights and then assert them at the appropriate time. Just like I enjoy reading about the Darwin award winners, if someone is so stupid as to agree to a search of his vehicle that is full of illegal contraband, then I hope he gets arrested and thrown in prison.

    What about the police trick of phrasing the "request" as if it's a command? What about them being able to lie, legally? When you combine these kind of tactics, with the potential of being hauled to jail or being beaten if you assert your rights and a court later rules they weren't really your rights, I think the pendulum has swung to far for the average citizen to actually know which of their rights the government is currently recognizing.
     
    Top Bottom