Epilogue Beyond Basketball: From Proactive to Reactive

Abstract

Abstract The Epilogue concludes the book by drawing on the normative distinction between proactive and reactive policing. Proactive policing often involves deceptive and dishonest tactics (undercover and sting operations, for example) on par with fraud. Proactive policing on par with fraud is likely to be legitimate only when consistent with societal commitments to personhood, as well as the need for timely action regarding emergencies that involve serious harm to the public. We can compare such (justified) cases of proactive policing with the routine (and likely unjustified) use of proactive deception and dishonesty in cases involving, say, illegal narcotics (or cheating basketball coaches). Reactive policing is inherently more constrained and democratic: it limits the police by giving citizens the power to authorize police action (through citizen calls for service, for example). The Epilogue closes by sketching concrete reform options regarding police deception and dishonesty, in contrast to more radical calls to abolish the police altogether.