Now retailers no longer have to feel guilty about pushing Christmas items (even though I've seen them on shelves since before Halloween).
For those of you still more interested in goblins, and ghosts, and things that go bump in the night, don't fret, there are some major spooky things going down.
Can you hear the ominous music, slowly increasing in volume, getting ready to hit peak Janet-Leigh-in-the-Bates-Hotel-shower levels.
Anthony Perkins isn't about to leap out with a knife, but a potentially more sinister threat lies in wait close by...
Okay, enough scene setting/chewing, here it is: This week, the Constitution of the United States is facing some of it's biggest challenges ever this week.
Questions about the Miranda rights may alter the way the 5 and 14th amendments are interpreted, and a clause in the Campaign Finance Reform Bill may put limits on the 1st Amendment.
We associate Miranda Rights with the "Right to be silent...speech often repeated in on film and TV. In actuality, it's a little bit altered than the form most people can recite, and after each you have the right__, one is suppossed to ask if the person understands. There's no official way of reading one their rights, but one is suppossed to cover all their bases (though I've always enjoyed the scene in Police Academy 2 where Steve Guttenberg adds "You have the right to sing the blues...).
Putting aside the debate over how they are read, there is a push by some groups of people to not require all the Miranda rights to be read and not remind a person they have the right to remain silent.
This may seem like a duh, and I'll skip the obvious jokes here, but it's a Constitutionally granted right. The 5th amendment says you don't have to incriminate yourself and the 14th amendment promises due process of law.
Please keep in mind, these rights are not there to keep lawbreakers out of jail, but to protect the innocent.
This is to remind shaken people to keep from making foolish comments that may be misinterpretted, as well as help protect people from a forced confession.
If the challenge is turned down and the current practice upheld, I'll miss the entertaining stories where an idiot confessed everything, and then later tried to sue because they "didn't know they wasn't 'spossed to talk." Those stories write themselves and leave the reader with a smile on their face. Still, keeping it in practice avoids the scenario where a guilty man's shock-induced rants are misunderstood and put him behind bars.
Miranda rights are there for the innocent, and there they should stay.
The First amendment contains what I believe to be the most tried and frequently challenged rights Americans enjoy: Freedoms of Speech, Press, Religion, peaceful assembly, and to petition the government.
Speech is challenged once again. A rule in the Campaign Finance Law Recently Passed would limit speech over the airwaves before political primaries and general elections.
Can you imagine Jay Leno not making fun of Bush's mispokenables? No Conan O'Brien conversing with a politician and superimposed lips? No SNL Weekend Update making fun of everybody?
It could happen. Forums likes TV or radio broadcasts, all legally part of the public domain, could be held to the strict, silent standard.
If upheld, can you imagine the lawsuits prosecuting violaters?
The United States vs. David Letterman, The Late Show with David Letterman.
Everyone vs. The Daily Show and Especially that Jon Stewart Punk
This is nuts, and this isn't what people who wanted campaign finance reforms to be made.
The system needed changes, few honest people doubt that. Money loop holes, questions about contributors, and other questionable activities have been worked on (not fixed, but they're working on them).
Silencing people, however, won't level the playing field as most of these reforms intend to do. It instead tilts it in favor of incumbents who can call a press conference and get easy coverage. Meanwhile,his oponent, who has a much smaller draw, won't get as much attention even if he calls a conference, and at the same time couldn't have pay for ads to combat misrepresentations.
I hate mug slinging ads as much as anyone else (and being in a Key State race as Missouri in the last election, didn't help any Missourian's attitude as we were flooded with an even greater deluge than normal). They're annoying, bothersome, and a bummer.
Still, we need them too; not only to keep people well informed but also to help us keep laughing (which is just as important).
Law students of the future may be thankful for two likely benchmarks cases being held so close together (MEMORY AID FOR FUTURE WANNA BE LAWYERS: In December of 2002, first lawmen, and later Lettermen, were told what not to say, and when.)
Remember your rights. When we forget to look after things, that's when they're most likely to be left behind, or forgotten.
That goes for your rights and your wallet!
It's late and I have a lot to do tomorrow. I'd tell you what I have to do, but I'd like to remain silent because I still remember I have the right.
Besides, I use that right so rarely, it would do me some good.
