Peirspictiochtai Ar An Saol
Zero-Based Law Enforcement
Part Seventeen
This segment of this series of news columns is likely to be both the easiest to understand and yet, the most difficult to implement through Zero-Based Law Enforcement.
That's because of the dilemma between several philosophies and the real world as it exists today.
Many people were raised with specific beliefs about justice in America.
A few key aspects:
A person is innocent until proven guilty.
It is better to let ten guilty men go free than to imprison one innocent man.
If you've done nothing wrong, you shouldn't be afraid of law enforcement officers.
If you've done nothing wrong, you shouldn't run from the law enforcement officers.
Innocent people don't confess to criminal activity; Only guilty people do so.
Underlying the dilemma is that law enforcement serves as the front door to the justice system, and, at that front door to the justice system, law enforcement officers not only can lie – lie by commission and lie by omission – when dealing with the general public, they are explicitly given permission to lie to people.
Why in the world would you – or anyone else – believe a law enforcement officer when that individual can be lying to you? And those lies – whether by commission or omission – can then be used to encourage you to say things that would then be used against you.
To take your freedom.
To take your treasure.
To take your life (in some states).
Let's look at those key aspects noted above.
Do you really believe a person is innocent until proven guilty?
Or, do you immediately treat that person – whether by word or deed – as a guilty person?
Do you suspend everything you knew about that person – which could literally be no knowledge of that person – and assume that if they're being detained, investigated, arrested, or imprisoned, that they therefore must be guilty?
Of at least something?
Maybe not everything, but likely something?
Would you really want ten guilty men (or women) to go free to avoid imprisoning one innocent man (or woman)?
Or, would you find it acceptable if some innocent people get detained, investigated, arrested, and/or imprisoned so that all of the guilty people get detained, investigated, arrested, and/or imprisoned?
If the latter, how many innocent people is it acceptable to detain, investigate, arrest, and imprison?
What if that innocent person was you?
What if that innocent person was someone you knew was innocent?
If you know law enforcement officers are allowed to lie to someone and are protected if they use lies, why wouldn't you be afraid of law enforcement officers and what they might do to you?
If a person wasn't a law enforcement officer and you found out that person lied to you about something important, would you ever trust that person again?
If you wouldn't trust that person again, why would you trust a law enforcement officer?
If a person has done nothing wrong, would they stop and talk with a law enforcement officer knowing that the law enforcement officer is allowed to lie to someone and is protected if they use lies?
What if that person was you?
What if that person was someone you knew was innocent?
If a person has done nothing wrong, would any amount of intimidation or pressure make them say something to a law enforcement officer that would lead to a confession knowing that the law enforcement officer is allowed to lie to someone and is protected if they use lies?
Do you think a person can be intimidated or pressured by a law enforcement officer to say something that would lead to a confession?
Do you think a person with limited language skills can be intimidated or pressured by a law enforcement officer to say something that would lead to a confession?
Do you think a person with limited education can be intimidated or pressured by a law enforcement officer to say something that would lead to a confession?
Do you think a person with limited street smarts can be intimidated or pressured by a law enforcement officer to say something that would lead to a confession?
Do you think a person who is highly educated can be intimidated or pressured by a law enforcement officer to say something that would lead to a confession?
Do you think that you can be intimidated or pressured by a law enforcement officer to say something that would lead to a confession?
Do you think a person you know to be innocent can be intimidated or pressured by a law enforcement officer to say something that would lead to a confession?
Through Zero-Based Law Enforcement, law enforcement officers would have to tell the truth to all.
No lying by commission.
No lying by omission.
No protection if they lie.
Please note: Zero-Based Law Enforcement would still allow lying if a lie would be done in self-defense for law enforcement officers to protect themselves while in imminent danger and would still allow law enforcement officers to lie to protect third-parties in imminent danger.
These two narrow exceptions – and they should be considered narrow exceptions – would apply in situations where the aim is not to detain, investigate, arrest, or imprison an individual, but would apply in situations where a law enforcement officer is striving to protect life.
An example: A person known to a law enforcement officer as an individual who had been previously convicted of beating his wife asks that law enforcement officer for the location of his wife. The law enforcement officer is aware that an order of protection had been issued by a court to the wife of the person asking the question. Based on his knowledge of this specific case, the law enforcement officer knows the location of the wife.
The law enforcement officer, in this specific situation, could simply tell the truth: "You (the person seeking the location of his wife) know that an order of protection has been issued by the court. You are not allowed to be anywhere near your wife."
The law enforcement officer, in this specific situation, could also decide that the individual seeking the location of his wife is likely to ignore the order of protection because the law enforcement officer has direct knowledge that the individual has previously disregarded orders of protection issued by the court. In that case, the law enforcement officer might state "I don't know" or something similar and then goes on their way. Out of earshot of the individual seeking the location of his wife, the law enforcement officer alerts the law enforcement entity of the interaction with that individual. Steps are then taken to protect the wife from potential harm.
Beyond the narrow exceptions for self-defense and for the protection of third-parties in imminent danger, law enforcement officers operating through Zero-Based Law Enforcement would have to tell the truth to all.
Only with a wholesale change in policy would law enforcement officers gain the right to be believed simply because of their position of trust.
After all, how does a person know – today – when a law enforcement officer is telling the truth – not lying by commission and not lying by omission?
If a person doesn't know, why should that individual believe – or trust – anything coming from that law enforcement officer?
When people don't believe law enforcement officers, those individuals don't seek help from the very people deemed the ones who should be protecting them.
When people don't believe law enforcement officers, those individuals don't come forward with information that would be helpful for law enforcement officers to locate individuals who engaged in criminal activity.
When people don't believe law enforcement officers, guilty people remain free from justice and innocent people run the risk of being deemed guilty.
Law enforcement officers operating through Zero-Based Law Enforcement would treat all with respect by telling the truth always.
No longer would law enforcement officers lie just because they can lie.
No longer would law enforcement officers lie just because they are protected when they lie.
No longer would law enforcement officers just tell the truth when they're under oath.
Lying – by commission and by omission – has no place in Zero-Based Law Enforcement.
Will this change in policy make it more difficult to detain, investigate, arrest, and imprison individuals?
Yes.
It should be difficult – very difficult – for law enforcement – acting on behalf of the government – to take a person's freedom, a person's treasure, and a person's life.
The next news column in this series on Zero-Based Law Enforcement will focus on how law enforcement officers would choose to review past actions and, where appropriate, apologize for actions taken that did not lead to justice.
Peirspictiochtai Ar A Saol – Gaelic – Irish – for "Perspectives On Life" is a column focused on aspects of accountability and responsibility as well as ways people look at life.
Contact Richard McDonough at
© 2026 Richard McDonough
