Eugene,

"The US Constitution has been ammended thousands of times by judges...." Your words, not mine. That was last week, now it's "modified" instead of ammended. You were wrong, my friend, admit it.

The Supreme Court certainly does have the right to interpret the Constitution and that's what they did with the Miranda ruling. It's what is called a prophylactic ruling. Some of these ruling are controversial but unless the court reverses it's own ruling. It's the law.

I really don't understand what you have against making sure that someone knows his Constitutional rights. That is the reason for the Constitution in the first place, to grant these rights to the people. I personally cannot imagine why anyone in law inforcement would want it any other way. After all, don't they do take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution? That's what they should do, not try to get around it.

As for your Texas state Constitution, you can feel any way that you want about it.
It's when you state that's it's superior to the federal and most other state Constitutions, and then can offer no proof or support for such a statement, that I start to chuckle.