I've had several conversations recently with people about the American legal system, and the same stupid question came up in all of them.  I'm sure you've all heard this question or even been asked it: "Is it worse for an innocent person to be convicted or for a guilty person to go free."

Notice something wrong with the question?  How about the fact that it isn't an either/or question.  If an innocent person is convicted, then a guilty person must also have gone free.  (Or there was no crime, which is, possibly, even worse.)  The question is really asking whether you prefer one injustice or two.  But people who think it's worse for a guilty person to go free refuse to grasp that convicting innocent people does let guilty people go free.

Oh, my aching brain.