As Americans, we are mislead by a common phrase that is fundamental to our criminal legal system: "innocent until proven guilty". We feel entitled to a level of protection that simply does not exist. In fact, the phrase is literally self-contradictory in the context of any sort of criminal proceeding. If you are presumed innocent, then how could you even be arrested and tried?

What the phrase really implies is that the burden of proof is on the accuser rather than the accused. That is, if you are accused of a crime, then you are not required to defend yourself (in fact, you have the right to remain silent for the entirety of the proceedings - see Miranda and the 5th amendment). The burden of proof lies completely on the accuser.

Now, this seems pretty obvious. The problem is not so much that this system is wrong, it's the false sense of security that it bestows on the citizenry. People believe that if they've done nothing wrong (or illegal) then they will be presumed innocent and terrible things will not happen to them at the hands of our government. Of course, this assumption relies on the idea that a criminal conviction is the only terrible thing that can happen to a person. This is most emphatically not the case. You might be detained indefinitely without trial. You might have your reputation destroyed. You might have your children taken. You might be financially ruined defending yourself (simply being detained can ruin most people financially - it's difficult to earn a living from within a cell).

Our current climate of fear has elevated the likelihood of this happening to anyone. I've heard it claimed by a top-level government official that anyone on the no-fly list is "not part of the American family" and should not have the right to bear arms. Never mind that the no-fly list is not a list of convicted terrorists (nor even too specific about why such individuals have been placed there). It's the modern equivalent of McCarthy's list of Communists. Remember this: we have absolutely no idea why most of the people on that list have been placed there, nor can we even hope to find out. These people have been "convicted" completely outside of our legal system. I'd be willing to be that at this point every single person in the U.S. knows at least one person on the no-fly list. I personally know two (one because he has a common name, the other because she was in an animal-rights group during college a decade ago). Of course, since most people don't fly that often, most of them may not even realize they are on that list.

Maoist China had a similar list of people who were tormented under that regime. The motivations for putting people there were varied, but it was quite well known that the "Gang of Four" used this list for their own political ends. Anyone critical of their regime was likely to find themselves imprisoned repeatedly without any specific cause nor with any expectation of a trial.

As Americans, we suffer from a sense that we are somehow superior to these sorts of things. Those things only happen "over there" or "back then". In our arrogance we think that it won't happen here.

To bad it already has.