It is important for the reader to understand that the author is NOT "anti-cop". Early on in the book, he says the following:
Before we begin, a few organizational notes are in order. First, this is not an “anti-cop” book. Although it includes plenty of anecdotes about bad cops, there are plenty of good cops. Some of them are interviewed in this book. The fact is that we need cops, and there are limited situations in which we need SWAT teams. If anything, this is an anti-politician book. Bad cops are the product of bad policy. And policy is ultimately made by politicians. A bad system loaded with bad incentives will unfailingly produce bad cops. The good ones will never enter the field in the first place, or they will become frustrated and leave police work, or they’ll simply turn bad. At best, they’ll have unrewarding, unfulfilling jobs. This book explores the consequences of having cops who are too angry and too eager to kick down doors and who approach their jobs with entirely the wrong mind-set, but with an eye toward identifying and changing the policies that allow such people to become cops in the first place—and that allow them to flourish in police work.
Rather, it is a book about bad policy-making by intellectually dishonest politicians, including iconic figures from both major parties, and the literally deadly impact that sometimes has on the lives of Americans of all stripes, who have literally done no wrong. Cops are depicted for the most part as merely the (often unenthusiastic) enforcers of these bad policies, who sometimes find themselves in the untenable position of enforcing laws which violate the individual citizen's innate cultural and historical understanding of common law and human rights.
If anything, I would say that this book helps me to better understand what a difficult line officers have, the history behind their directives; and also to be more demanding of their leadership for better hiring and training practices; and to be WAY more demanding of the politicians who rely on police to enforce the means of getting them re-elected, to demand that they begin to repeal and redirect their efforts into directions more consistent with the Constitution. It has driven the nail into the coffin of any regard I might have had for allegedly "conservative" SCOTUS justices. It also makes me more proud of my decision to become a political independent and not swear my fealty to any party ever again.......3rd parties included......by registering as a party voter. It also reminds of me a favorite quote from H.L. Mencken: "Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under".
If the book has any political "slant" at all, I would describe it as mildly libertarian, although as far as I've read to this point, the author has not mentioned libertarianism, the Libertarian Party, or libertarian politicians. He does address certain favorite libertarian themes, such as the futility of the "war on drugs".......and most other "war on [place name here]" policies. He also spends a fair amount of time describing how "no-knock" raids became lawful through the political process. But he is also honest about, and supports with tons of documentation, exactly why and how public perception of crime - often inaccurate - is both drives and is informed by legislative "wars on whatever", which in turn are usually about the aggregation of power, at the expense of the Constitution. He equally distributes both blame and praise among both parties. My impression so far is that the author's primary allegiance is to the Constitution, and parties be hanged.
How far we have strayed. Anyway, I highly recommend this book to anyone who cares about these matters.