Is it really the end?

The title of 'The End of Policing' poses quite a stark hypothetical. Is Vitale really suggesting that there should be no more police, that society would be better off if they weren't there at all? The actual argument isn't quite as radical as the provocative title, though it is still profound in its implications and sweeping in its scope. Vitale is not saying that there is no legitimate function whatsoever to the police, but instead that police have been asked to perform social functions far beyond the scope of their expertise and the suitability of their methods, filling the gaps left by neglect of non-punitive social programs, and resulting in profound systemic injustices. Vitale takes a very broad-ranging view of his subject, frequently indulging in what could uncharitably be called tangents, concerning matters that are not narrowly related to policing—homelessness, mental health, sex work, immigration policy, etc—but give some view of how policing influences and is influenced by larger societal structures. These things are all connected, and the argument is necessarily broad, so the eclecticism is arguably justified. Vitale's recommendations are as sweeping as his diagnosis, basically amounting to the pursuit of the progressive political project in all its various facets, in addition to the incremental reforms that are often proposed (which he views as insufficient on their own). There are some quick solutions offered, like the appointment of dedicated prosecutors for police abuses, but Vitale recognises that structural problems can only be solved with structural change, and that's no easy fix.

All of this will probably come without much surprise to anyone with more than a passing interest in the subject, so on that front this book probably serves more as a place to round up the various arguments for reference purposes rather than as a place to learn new arguments. What I found the most novel were the historical background sections, which were filled with jaw-dropping details about the founding and early histories of police forces like the London Metropolitan Police and the Pennsylvania State Police (the former seems to have had its roots in oppression of the Irish, while the latter was explicitly formed to break strikes). The revelations about early policing cast modern policing in a very harsh light and made me all the more receptive to Vitale's criticisms.

It is clear that there is a slant to this book, and it probably elides many rebuttals that would be offered by police apologists, but Vitale makes a very articulate and forceful case, and if he's in any way correct then the urgency of reform cannot be overstated.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!

3 people found this helpful