Skip to comments.Next-generation handcuffs deliver electric shocks, drugs to detainees
Posted on 12/24/2012 11:18:05 AM PST by JOAT
Definitely an interesting, if not controversial, invention for the field of law enforcement, a new set of handcuffs delivers electric shocks like a taser.
Covered in detail on Patent Bolt recently, a patent application for an advanced set of handcuffs was published by the U.S. Patent & Trademark office during late November 2012. Filed by a group called Scottsdale Inventions during late 2010, technology that could potentially go into the handcuff design includes an accelerometer, a location sensing device, a microphone; a camera and a biometric sensor to measure a detainees physical state. However, the group has also designed the handcuffs to house electrodes that would deliver an electric shock to a detainee.
In addition to the electrodes, the patent details a substance delivery system thats designed to administer anything from medication to irritants. Delivery systems include a moveable needle for liquids or a gas injection system to deliver a paralytic or sedative. Similar to the data collected regarding incidents of electric shocks, its likely that the device will record instances where substances are delivered to detainees.
The handcuffs do include a warning system that would alert the detainee that the delivery of a shock or substance is imminent unless behavior was corrected. The patent outlines a red LED warning light on the device that would turn on in addition to a small speaker that would emit a loud tone before the device is activated.
The patent also details the possibility of using location data to keep the detainee in a specific area or away from another detainee.
Read more at link, also pics.
(Excerpt) Read more at digitaltrends.com ...
The “Bondage” crowd is salivating right now!
Yes, and besides Star Trek, I thought of the Arnold flick with the explosive collars if you strayed out of the control area.
Sounds like a law suit to me.
Romans used to cut the tendons behind the knees to keep slaves from ‘running’ away....
You beat me to it!
Law suits assume you still have ‘rights!’
Paybacks are a b*tch...
In fact, I think the real target has been us all along.
Playing in the sand box was preparation and training to crack hard, resistant enclaves of the real eventual enemy...patriots.
There was a syfi story called, “The Ring” about a device
like this, go out of an area, immobilized, attempt to
remove immobilized, etc. The hero was eventually in an
accident that removed his finger and so was free of
the device. Don’t know the author.
and exactly where do police get the medical licenses they need to administer drugs? Talk about dangerous and stupid.
When you’re born, they just implant it in your neck
and you’re good to go.
Additionally, 'dangerous' has been thoroughly discussed by your local panel of Obamacare experts, so be calm.
“Our benevolent overlords sure love anything related to control!”
But they better darn sure never catch you waterboarding somebody...especially someone in a turban.
Oh, that's all well and good for the new drill thrawls smarty-pants, but what are you gonna do with the old curmudgeons?
Obviously a SOLUTION is needed, and these cuffs can aid with the final solution to 'those people.'
Because people sporting towels are not the enemy of this government.
Ah, but we DO waterboard terrorists. Which is exactly why they’ll be doing it to the rest of us too.
My brother had that album, Zagger and Evans or some such?
Interstate commerce clause.
I don’t think this design will amount to anything. The modern cuff design has stuck in part because it’s very simple to use, and also very durable. When you start adding more moving parts and gadgets, you have more points of failure, and more things can go wrong when you are trying to get these things on an uncooperative person.
Sounds like an inspired and brilliant idea to me.
If your intention is a standard arrest, conventional cuffs are just the ticket.
On the other hand, if you have neutralized a cell of folks that need to be made an example of, parading them around prior to an eventual execution might be beneficial to creating a controllable environment. Nothing like watching your hero contort with Tased energy.
And the 'enemy' (a.k.a. us) can't stage a rescue, because with a push of a button, you can inject your prize with a lethal dose of whatever you like.
Me too, as long as I'm the one holding the control fob.
“The Bondage crowd is salivating right now!”
HA! You beat me to it. Well done!
go to far and your head blows off.
This won’t fly.
The simple comparison is to the shock belt, which was going to be all the rage some years ago. A belt with handcuffs, so if a defendant misbehaved in court, he could be administered a paralyzing electrical jolt by remote control.
Well, this was all well and good, except there was more than one signalling device. The judge had one, the prosecutor had one, and perhaps the bailiff had one. Trouble was that you couldn’t tell which one of them pushed the button.
And there is just enough sadism in the criminal justice system so that if you were given one of these belts, you were likely to be shocked, at least once. And not necessarily for a good reason.
So it was decided that such belts should not be used.
You mean like a Vorta Termination Implant...
Yup, they would love that control over us wouldn't they...
Obviously a SOLUTION is needed, and these cuffs can aid with the final solution to 'those people.'
Oh they will just mandate that any medical procedure for anyone over 50 is to be denied, even if the old geezer pays for it themselves...
Eventually they will lower that age to 30 then have "forced euthanasia"....
Then they can make sure all the young-uns have implants...
Clearly, the people who made this decision lacked a certain 'zest' required for this new era of governance.
Remember, the Constitution is just "da^&ed piece of paper" according to a former president.
So any former notions of you possessing 'rights' are a quaint throwback to a simpler time.
Maybe, but I think they’d find out with that scenario, that anything you give to a prisoner, that prisoner will try to find a way to use for their own purposes. They’ll figure out a way to tamper with them and shock each other or get the drugs out, or something.
“And there is just enough sadism in the criminal justice system so that if you were given one of these belts, you were likely to be shocked, at least once.”
It’s not just the criminal justice system, it’s humanity in general. They did studies with grad students given the power to shock each other, and they all very quickly adapted to using that power sadistically.
Yet, we ignore what we know of human nature and give cops tazers, knowing they’ll be used for torture.
The CIA claims Zero Dark Thirty lies.
Jack Vance has a similar story, the Durdane trilogy from the early 70s.
“The land of Shant on the planet Durdane is ruled by a purposely anonymous dictator called the Anome or Faceless Man. He maintains control by virtue of the torc, a ring of explosive placed around the neck of every adult in Shant.”
Two things, first most cops prefer tasers, because guns only have three modes, holstered, brandished, and shooting; but the vast majority of what they do needs something intermediate to that. Other weapons, like a billy club or a tonfa, have their own problems as well.
As far as the Milgram experiment, of giving shocks, while that was a basic breakthrough, there is much, much more to that psychology.
For example, individual action vs. mob action, “identity known” action vs. anonymous action, and one I have been very surprised by, is what I would call “Internet mob mentality”.
In a forum like FR, most posters are well behaved, with just some minimal moderation. But in other forums, anonymous posters can turn vicious, given the right subject.
One that impressed me was a discussion about crime and punishment, where posters were almost in a contest of how sadistic they could be towards prisoners, and their approval of the sadism of others. Torture such as flogging, branding, amputation, and the death penalty for even petty crimes. Some showed twisted creativity in this.
But it also raised the question of were they just too inhibited to propose this in person to someone else, or if they found the peer approval they wanted, were they serious about these things?
“But it also raised the question of were they just too inhibited to propose this in person to someone else, or if they found the peer approval they wanted, were they serious about these things?”
I think it’s a mixture of two phenomena: first, there are those who were serious, and simply found an opportunity to express unorthodox views without being rejected, and second, there are those who may not have been serious, but just jumped on the bandwagon because of mob mentality.
You see similar stuff with something like the Occupy Wall Street protestors. The committed anarchists and radicals latch on to it as an opportunity to voice their extreme views in a welcoming environment, and the hipster hangers-on just mostly parrot those views, because they think it will make them look cool and help them pick up protestor chicks.
“Two things, first most cops prefer tasers, because guns only have three modes, holstered, brandished, and shooting; but the vast majority of what they do needs something intermediate to that. Other weapons, like a billy club or a tonfa, have their own problems as well.”
Yes, the idea of giving police a nonlethal, but effective weapon, was a noble one. I just think the decision that the Tazer is the right weapon for that job is not well thought-out, and perhaps, lacking a better alternative, the idea itself may prove to be mistaken.
Previously, without the tazer available, the police officer had more limited options if they encountered some noncompliance. They could either try to talk to the subject and reason with them, or perhaps intimidate them into cooperating, or they could escalate to getting physical with the club and restraining holds, or ultimately, escalate to the use of firearms. Now, they have what seems like a much easier option, of escalating to the tazer.
The result of this, as far as I can see, is that the officers are not as hesistant to escalate the situation anymore, since they see the tazer as a “humane”, nonlethal escalation. So, in situations which they previously might have defused with patience and communication, they will most likely not exercise such patience, and will just taze the subject into compliance. It seems to me, at least with many cops, this rushing to escalate, just to end a situation quickly, is becoming habitual, and it can have unintended consequences.
That it might be abused by the police is always a concern, but there is the flip side to that argument, that far too often, reason and argument are not at issue at all.
That is, talk to street cops and they will probably admit to fisticuffs far too often, drunks who are so drunk they can’t even see the gun pointed at them and want to wrestle. And some types of druggies that will take half a dozen cops to take down enough to handcuff.
And this takes serious wear and tear on a cop, because even if you win fight after fight, the little injuries add up over time.
Sometimes raw emotions are just as blinding as are alcohol and drugs. This is why cops don’t like domestic fights, because anyone on the scene can suddenly turn on you, individually or as a group.
So bottom line is that a Taser is just a tool, like a gun, club, pepper spray, etc. It’s up to the cop whether they are used appropriately or abusively.