General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCop in CA certified to use nunchucks on-duty... Nunchucks are illegal in CA.
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/you-cant-make-stuff-cops-begin-carrying-nunchucks-subdue-suspectsSgt. Casey Day was recently certified to use nunchucks for the Anderson Police Department. He explained the different ways they can be used to help law enforcement.
He said they can be used to hit, strike, jab and take someone down. They can also be used as a restraint to lock someones hand, elbow or ankle.
Another ironic facet to this ridiculous endeavor by the Anderson police department is that nunchucks are illegal in California seriously they are.
While it is perfectly legal to own two sticks and a rope, the second you attach the three items, you become a criminal unless of course, you are above the law, like cops.
------------------------
"Hand, elbow or ankle." Don't make me laugh. How long until cops start choking suspects with nunchucks?
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Pretty quickly depending on the color of one's skin.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,479 posts)pintobean
(18,101 posts)Yet, cops do it, as they should. I'm all for giving cops the right to carry whatever non-lethal weapons they want. Nunchucks are preferable to bullets in many situations.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)It's another thing to carry a weapon that can easily be used to torture a suspect.
Hey, have you read that story about the suspect who was restrained to a chair in the precinct and then tased in the testicles? Google it.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Torturing suspects is illegal. Would you rather the gun be the only tool available to them?
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)When a lethal weapon is used for torture, it leaves marks, because it was actually designed to damage the body.
Tasers were designed for pain, so cops think they can liberally tase anyone because it doesn't really count.
(About 10 years ago, somebody developed handcuffs that would allow the cop to tase the handcuffed suspect by remote-control. Luckily, they never caught on.)
Beating someone with a baton or a nunchuck leaves two marks: The legal mark that the cop used violence on the suspect and a mark in the consciousness: The cop realizes that he is dealing out harm.
But with tasers, it's sanitary: You are not hitting him, you are just pressing a button. And you are not causing fleshwounds, so how bad could it possibly be?
What if cops had a non-lethal weapon that allowed them to choke a suspect without leaving a mark? Why wouldn't they choke the suspect? It incapacitates the suspect and it's non-lethal, so it doesn't count. And if the suspect dies anyways, you have always been taught that you are theoretically in the right anyways and in practice the whole legal system has your back anyways.
exboyfil
(17,863 posts)One day a kid went after my friend with a pair of nunchucks. My friend promptly took them away from him and threw them on top of the school building. Didn't see it, but I heard about it.
Nothing to do with the story, just a fond memory.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)to have tools of violence and authority to use them that other citizens do not.
That status has arguably been abused, but there is no argument at all that the uniform is a warning to the public that interacting with the person wearing it can be dangerous.
I'm no more worried about nunchucks than I am the other things on their tool belt from pepper-spray to pistols but I prefer police in uniforms, and when they aren't dressed in warning attire I expect them to take off the tool belts and to be non-threatening.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)IDemo
(16,926 posts)Orrex
(63,216 posts)Kowabunga!