Almost all humans to a certain extent are dissatisfied with the limited availability of resources, but if you're speaking from an academic point of view, it would be Economists, since they study choices made from this limited availability.
Answer:
Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966) is a historical case examined by the Supreme Court. By a decision in this case, the court established that any evidence, whether confessing or exculpatory, can be used in court only if the prosecution can prove that the suspect was informed before the interrogation about the right to a lawyer and about the right not to testify against himself. At the same time, in case of refusal of the suspect from his rights, it is necessary to prove its voluntariness. The Miranda case set a precedent requiring all police departments to inform detainees of their rights to a lawyer and silence. These warnings are called the Miranda rule. The Supreme Court equated the Miranda Rule with constitutional acts.
Explanation:
Any options, that are not listed here.
Answer:
In 1912, the Xuantong Emperor abdicated as a result of the Xinhai Revolution, and the Republic of China was established in Nanjing by revolutionaries under Sun Yat-sen. ... The Republic of China, led by President Chiang Kai-Shek, retreated the government of the Republic of China to Taiwan.
