Scan barcode
dda9's review
4.0
This book is scarier than Stephen King. Having your door crash in during the night, a dozen or more men storming in, screaming and breaking, grabbing people and throwing them to the ground, pointing guns at them. This would be a truly terrifying experience. What makes it even more horrifying is that the natural reaction to having your door crash open in the middle of the night is to run for your gun to defend your family. You would have no way to know that it was the police (and even if they do "announce" themselves are you going to be in the frame of mind to calmly process information?), so you would try to defend the people you love - and you would die. You would be completely justified in protecting your family from violence, but you would still be dead.
Every American citizen should be aware of the horrible abuses of freedom and human rights taking place right here in our own country.
Every American citizen should be aware of the horrible abuses of freedom and human rights taking place right here in our own country.
veganhitchhiker's review
3.5
There seemed to be a clear path to the conclusion and then a swift right turn made the conclusion make no sense at all.
ttodd86's review
4.0
An interesting and important read that provides a historical background and some insight into modern day policing. In the current environment (summer 2020) there are a lot of questions about policing and this book provides some explanation. It might read better with a reduction in the number of police abuses and missteps recounted in detail (this is not to discount the importance of these events nor the suffering and turmoil introduced into the lives of the victims -- I am speaking purely from the perspective of a reader interested in understanding some of the broader issues). But the book's key points are important ones for policymakers and the public to consider. The politician/police relationship in this country, as recounted here, is troubling. There are serious questions to be asked about who should be holding police accountable. It seems like politicians, often looking to bolster their "tough on crime" credentials, may have reason for bias. Courts, understandably, give much weight to the credibility of any police officer versus that of almost any standard citizen. To be sure, not all cops are bad, but the transition towards a more militaristic police force versus one of community policing is troubling.
antonio_buehler's review against another edition
5.0
I originally bought this book in 2013 at a police accountability summit I helped organize in which Radley Balko was one of the two keynote speakers. I'm glad I didn't read that version, and instead waited until this updated version was released. What was added to the updated version, from an acknowledgement that not enough attention was given to issues of race in the first edition; to an update on how these issues have evolved during Obama's 2nd term, Trumps term; and the inclusion of stories of abuse and murders by cops to include Michael Brown, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd, as well as the public and police responses in the aftermath of those murders; made what was already a super informative and enlightening book even better.
Overall, this book is a must read for conservatives and liberals alike. Conservatives because it highlights the hypocrisy that comes from the right when it comes to the language they use to talk about freedom and liberty and concerns of tyrannical government while endlessly cheerleading and defending cops (except when the cops kill white supremacists or try to stop an attempted coup); and liberals because it highlights the full endorsement and complicity of the political left in virtually every escalation of policing in American history, and their celebration of using police abuses when used against conservatives, and the willingness of Balko to drop names of the worst of the worst Democratic politicians (e.g., Joe Biden).
I also found many of the stories well told and quite compelling. I found the story of Norm Stamper's evolution throughout the first version of the book to be super interesting. Of course, even in the best of cop examples we find disappointment and failure to prevent the police from acting like police. I also appreciated the inclusion of the long history of an absolute disregard for the rights of Americans from famous military leaders such as Douglas MacArthur and George Patton, just in case anyone might assume that the military may one day provide protection from a police state. And I did appreciate the emphasis on the third amendment to help frame much of the militarization argument. Also, I appreciated the acknowledgement that the police have lower rules of engagement for American citizens than soldiers do for foreign nationals in war zones. Not that the ROE for soldiers are great for those people living in war zones, but people really don't believe me when I make the same point, and it is great that this point is so unambiguously shared in print.
More importantly, since neither conservatives nor liberals really care about police abuses and militarization except when it is convenient, this book is a fabulous history lesson for those who are interested in trying to understand how we got to where we are in policing as it walks through much of the history of the increasing militarization of policing over the decades, with ample context and explanations given to critical court cases and shifts in opinion. That gets it five stars from me.
That said, I do have criticisms:
1) Not enough emphasis placed on race and the very intentional role of policing to protect white supremacy and capitalist interests. However, I guess if you want to reach conservatives and right wing liberals then those can't be focused on too much.
2) This book gives too much of a 'things used to not be this bad' vibe but they've always been horrible, just in different ways. Particularly for certain groups. While policing is horrible now, if you were Black, or Indigenous, or on strike, or an anarchist, or an immigrant, in many ways in different eras it was worse. I do think that in many ways for middle class white people the police are certainly more of a threat now than they may have been in prior generations.
3) I found the recommendations to be disappointingly soft. Many were good (e.g., end the drug war), but some would provide only marginal benefit (e.g., abolishing qualified immunity) or the illusion of progress (e.g., community policing, body cameras), while the roots of the problem (e.g., the institution of policing, white supremacy) would be untouched.
4) Building off the prior point, I felt that the idea of police abolition was too easily waived off. While it would be radical for this society to move toward abolition, is it any more fantasy than believing the police will somehow begin to serve the people? Also, I don't think "defund the police" is a bad phrase because it turns people off, or that "shrink the police" would somehow be more palatable to people.
5) Not really a critique on the book because I was far too optimistic about the future in 2020, as well, but Balko was off target in the potential appetite for popular reform of the police. As has been made clear since this was published, even the most liberal of liberals continue to come down on the side of the most violent outcomes of policing, and the number of influential political leaders who embrace disrupting the destructive power of policing can easily be counted using just the fingers on one hand.
6) Finally, this book is an anti-cop book, and rightly so, despite what Balko may believe or say. Sure, you can say there are plenty of good cops, but for such a fabulously researched book it would be nice to have seen how exactly good cops can exist within such a horrifically inhumane system. What makes a cop "good"? He said he interviewed good cops. Who, the ones who spoke out after they left policing? Yes, bad cops are the product of bad policy, bad politicians, and other bad stakeholders, but I don't believe you should be able to do bad stuff, systematically, for money, and waive it off as bad decisions by politicians and judges. This book is filled with anecdotes of the devastating toll of policing on individuals, and sometimes communities. Cops are fully complicit in the harm of policing.
While this may seem like heavy criticism, I once again give this book five stars. It really is a great read and I highly recommend it, my caveats are simply noted.
Overall, this book is a must read for conservatives and liberals alike. Conservatives because it highlights the hypocrisy that comes from the right when it comes to the language they use to talk about freedom and liberty and concerns of tyrannical government while endlessly cheerleading and defending cops (except when the cops kill white supremacists or try to stop an attempted coup); and liberals because it highlights the full endorsement and complicity of the political left in virtually every escalation of policing in American history, and their celebration of using police abuses when used against conservatives, and the willingness of Balko to drop names of the worst of the worst Democratic politicians (e.g., Joe Biden).
I also found many of the stories well told and quite compelling. I found the story of Norm Stamper's evolution throughout the first version of the book to be super interesting. Of course, even in the best of cop examples we find disappointment and failure to prevent the police from acting like police. I also appreciated the inclusion of the long history of an absolute disregard for the rights of Americans from famous military leaders such as Douglas MacArthur and George Patton, just in case anyone might assume that the military may one day provide protection from a police state. And I did appreciate the emphasis on the third amendment to help frame much of the militarization argument. Also, I appreciated the acknowledgement that the police have lower rules of engagement for American citizens than soldiers do for foreign nationals in war zones. Not that the ROE for soldiers are great for those people living in war zones, but people really don't believe me when I make the same point, and it is great that this point is so unambiguously shared in print.
More importantly, since neither conservatives nor liberals really care about police abuses and militarization except when it is convenient, this book is a fabulous history lesson for those who are interested in trying to understand how we got to where we are in policing as it walks through much of the history of the increasing militarization of policing over the decades, with ample context and explanations given to critical court cases and shifts in opinion. That gets it five stars from me.
That said, I do have criticisms:
1) Not enough emphasis placed on race and the very intentional role of policing to protect white supremacy and capitalist interests. However, I guess if you want to reach conservatives and right wing liberals then those can't be focused on too much.
2) This book gives too much of a 'things used to not be this bad' vibe but they've always been horrible, just in different ways. Particularly for certain groups. While policing is horrible now, if you were Black, or Indigenous, or on strike, or an anarchist, or an immigrant, in many ways in different eras it was worse. I do think that in many ways for middle class white people the police are certainly more of a threat now than they may have been in prior generations.
3) I found the recommendations to be disappointingly soft. Many were good (e.g., end the drug war), but some would provide only marginal benefit (e.g., abolishing qualified immunity) or the illusion of progress (e.g., community policing, body cameras), while the roots of the problem (e.g., the institution of policing, white supremacy) would be untouched.
4) Building off the prior point, I felt that the idea of police abolition was too easily waived off. While it would be radical for this society to move toward abolition, is it any more fantasy than believing the police will somehow begin to serve the people? Also, I don't think "defund the police" is a bad phrase because it turns people off, or that "shrink the police" would somehow be more palatable to people.
5) Not really a critique on the book because I was far too optimistic about the future in 2020, as well, but Balko was off target in the potential appetite for popular reform of the police. As has been made clear since this was published, even the most liberal of liberals continue to come down on the side of the most violent outcomes of policing, and the number of influential political leaders who embrace disrupting the destructive power of policing can easily be counted using just the fingers on one hand.
6) Finally, this book is an anti-cop book, and rightly so, despite what Balko may believe or say. Sure, you can say there are plenty of good cops, but for such a fabulously researched book it would be nice to have seen how exactly good cops can exist within such a horrifically inhumane system. What makes a cop "good"? He said he interviewed good cops. Who, the ones who spoke out after they left policing? Yes, bad cops are the product of bad policy, bad politicians, and other bad stakeholders, but I don't believe you should be able to do bad stuff, systematically, for money, and waive it off as bad decisions by politicians and judges. This book is filled with anecdotes of the devastating toll of policing on individuals, and sometimes communities. Cops are fully complicit in the harm of policing.
While this may seem like heavy criticism, I once again give this book five stars. It really is a great read and I highly recommend it, my caveats are simply noted.
vari's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
5.0
rothgard's review against another edition
3.0
Really thorough history of the militarization of the police. Feels like the author tries too hard to not upset his readers, this causes the summary and conclusion to feel at best watered down and counter intuitive to the rest of the book.