Why do criminals have the same rights as honest citizens?
480994
Because of bleeding hearts that feel sorry for criminals
1068404
Go to your state local police station, they can do a search and give you enough information under the Information Freedom Act to let you know something about the person. Plus what folks don't seem to realize is that once you're a criminal you've pretty much lost all or most of your rights. In other words you're fair game.
316879
This question really requires an in-depth knowledge of every country's legal system, which is not very possible. 155 states, including some who in practice consider people guilty until proven innocent, have adopted the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states, "Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law." That is the vast majority of the 191 member states of the UN. I don't really care to compare the two lists, but you can if you so desire.
348572
Guilty untill proven innocent is now the way of this country. It is sad too. Many individuals can't even get a fair trial because so many believe if you get arrested then that means you are guilty. \n\nHowever, we still have a much better legal system than many other countries. We still have rights when we are arrested or even before we are arrested that many others around the world do not have. There are still many places is the world where you can be taken out of your home without an arrest warrent or any proof you did anything wrong. \n\nI would much rather be in the country, even with the "innocent untill proven guilty" turned upside down to "guilty till proven innocent', than living elsewhere in the world.\n\nWe may not have a perfect legal system, but at least we still have many rights others do not have. Plus, there is no such thing as a perfect legal system. \n\nLegal systems do the best they can. Those upholding and/or working within them are people just like you and me. They are therefor not perfect and can and do make mistakes. Is that sad and awfull when a persons liberty is at stake? Yes it is. \n\nBut, I would still rather, by a large margin, to live here with the legal climate we currently have, than anywhere else.
198998
Why would you ask that? I'm glad I have a right to choose, and do what I want, without being dicated to! Sure, there are laws, but if you aren't a criminal, you shouldn't have any worries. I wouldn't want it any other way!
964084
Police don't have the right to catch criminals, they have the responsibility within the framework of the US constitution. The US is the only democracy where the Exclusionary Rule voids evidence which was seized unlawfully. I believe that professional officers will almost always win over the actions of criminals. For the police, we have many more tools today than we did in the late 70's. DNA, in-car computers, video are but a few of the advances. Recent court decisions have continued to give more needed power to the police. To answer your question, I believe that it is balanced for the first time...
1043226
To keep society safe from criminals.
1077591
In Arizona back in the 1960's a man was arrested named "Miranda."  He was "encouraged" to confess to his crimes and later the US Supreme Court passed down the "Miranda" ruling which required police officers to inform arrested individuals of their rights;\n\nThe right to remain silent,\nThe fact that anything they say or do can be used against them,\nThe right to an attorney,\nAnd the right to an attorney if they can't afford one\n\nSadly the punishment for failure of law enforcement to engage in this practice is that guilty people are returned to society unpunished....
1134330
It usually applies to felony crimes that a citizen witnesses,  example, a citizen arrests/restrains a person who just shot another person, or an arsonist, larcenist... etc, until Police officers arrive on the scene.\n\nIt is lawful and a Right of CITIZENS to protect their communities, loved ones, themselves, home etc.  Not sure if illegal aliens have this right, nor punished for non-action(witnessing a crime and doing nothing)\n\nLocal laws vary, but all should define Citizens Arrest, who and what crimes it pertains to.  \n\nUsually misdemeanors are not covered by Citizen's arrest laws.  Police and street cameras handle those crimes.
1182306
It is atrocious to jail people without a trial, a lawyer or even one phone call; how can the US say that they are a "free" country?\n\nI am completely fine with locking up criminals but there has to be a process and evidence or the US just becomes a dictatorship.\n\n\n\nWe can not appeal to the conscience of the world when our own conscience is asleep.\nCarl von Ossietzky
828971
Let's take robbery.  You take something from someone else that doesn't belong to you.  It is a crime because you are violating someone else.  That is against our moral code.  When you break moral code there is a chance that your government has passed a law saying that it is illegal to do so.  The laws are in place so that everybody doesn't go around violating others.  The punishment is set by standards of society.  It is also set by what the perpetrator has done in his past (aka prior record).  That determines the sentence for the crime.  The punishment should be putting that person in a place where they have to reflect upon their crime and find the wrong in what they did so that hopefully they will never do it again.\nI hope that answers you question.
1153330
The legal system is not solely devoted to protecting individual rights.  It also regulates privileges, agencies, corporations, etc.\n\nWhich right of law-abiding citizens personal peace and security is being violated by the American legal system that you are referring to?  This question is too vague.
1074686
Please expand on your question.  In most cases, juveniles get MORE freedom than adults for the same crimes/accusations.
334070
Because we all have a Constitutional right to be tried by a jury of our peers.  We are so used to this that we often take it for granted.  Imagine if there were no juries, and one judge could decide whether or not someone was guilty of murder?  Imagine if that one judge was corrupt or prejudiced?  We are all very lucky that we can be tried by our peers, and not be put in jail simply because one man thinks we should.  In order to enjoy all the privileges of democracy we all have a civic duty to vote and to sit on juries.
397977
Because they want to see what is going on and if it has been discovered and if it is being investigated. They also like to listen to what people say about it.The criminal tends to have more to say and knows most about the crime and that usually gives them up. Not all criminals do go back in fact good ones never do. Depending upon the crime they committed it may be a Morbid curiosity or just wanting to see what the police know or people think they know.
148266
When you say the necessary requirements do you mean that as long as they are not felons (since felons cannot vote period)? Well either way, yes and no. Obviously there are many criminals out there that do not care about the country's ethics and they abuse it over and over over. Those criminals should never be allowed to vote. On the other hand, there are those that are truly reformed and deserve a chance to be an upstanding citizen again. For example, if someone has a record for protesting the war and starting chaos for a good cause, then he/she is hardly a menace to society. Over time that person can mature and learn to channel his/her views in a positive. That doesn't mean they should not be allowed to vote. On the hand, a criminal who has raped, killed, committed hate crimes against different races, etc. should NOT be able to--especially if they are repeat offenders.
624412
The actions of my daily life are free of intrusion by the goverment. And that the govermant will stand up against another citizn who witholds my right.\n\nAnd this is only on condition that these actions do not infringe on other people's right of freedom.