The work argues that after the 11 September attacks by Al-Qaeda in 2001, the United States and other countries began to see the tactic of targeted killing differently.

Jeff McMahan identifies the problematic nature of targeted killing and emphasizes regulations for law enforcement to avoid abuse of process.

Kevin H. Govern examines the elimination of Osama bin Laden and identifies this killing as justified and the product of a rational decision-making process.

[3][4] Abraham David Sofaer praised its treatment of the subject and tables, though he argued the book could have given more weight to the law enforcement model of the use of deadly force against individuals.

[1] Experts in the fields of public policy, politics, military regulations, battlefield knowledge, law, ethics, and philosophy discussed contemporaneous issues surrounding targeted killing in society.

[2] The conference was titled "Using Targeted Killing to Fight the War on Terror: Philosophical, Moral, and Legal Challenges" and was organized by the University of Pennsylvania Law School.

[6] At the time of the book's initial print publication date, its editor Andrew Altman worked as Professor of Philosophy at Georgia State University and concurrently as director of research at the Jean Beer Blumenfeld Center for Ethics.

[9] Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World was published in hardcover format by Oxford University Press on 30 April 2012.

"Targeting Co-Belligerents" by professor Jens David Ohlin supports Maxwell's opinion and describes an analytical viewpoint called "linkage" in which he states armed terrorists and members of organizations can be killed.

Philosophy professor Jeff McMahan of Rutgers University asks, "Targeted Killing: Murder, Combat or Law Enforcement?".

Mississippi College School of Law professor Richard V. Meyer writes that current regulations and standards for targeted killing are inadequate.

University of Tulsa School of Law professor Russell Christopher writes in "Imminence in Justified Targeted Killing" that self-defence should be ruled out as a suitable position in several examples of potential conflict.

[1][5] The fourth portion of the book discusses how to make specific choices in targeted killing situations prior to state actors carrying out actions against individuals.

American University Washington College of Law professor Kenneth Anderson distinguishes the use of military drones from targeted killing in his article "Efficiency in Bello and ad Bellum: Making the Use of Force Too Easy?".

Katz concludes that current regulations support targeted killing because existing law does not consider his argument and justifies the tactical elimination of terrorists.

[1] The reviewer wrote that the book "is a thought-provoking contribution that takes a refreshingly broad and timely approach in addressing the legal, ethical, and strategic-political dimension of the contemporary debate over targeted killings".

Nevertheless, the book reflects the entire spectrum of diverging views on the matter, and adds an important impetus to move the current debate forward.

[5] Sofaer wrote, "It is a beautiful book: large, with print size that is easy on the eyes, and with sufficient space between lines of text to make the complex material at least visually digestible.

[5] The collection also received a review from University of Geneva postdoctoral research fellow in the faculty of law, Steven J. Barela, in the Journal of International Criminal Justice.