non-lethal weapons

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cowboy Preacher

New member
Why does it seem that as non-LEOs we are not allowed to carry billy clubs, brass knuckles, blackjacks, and cuffs, but we can carry a .45 and a 12 gauge. This seems so wierd. It is like the lawyers want us to have to shoot someone. And ythe training in non-lethal weapons is kept from us the citizens. These instructors want to keep their secret little world close to all but the cops and military. This is a complete outrage to me. I should be allowed to defend myself with the same tools and methods the local fuzz use. If I have stepped on some toes good. Maybe that will get some people to thinking. Tell me if any of you cops belive in this dracoian practice of arms control.
 
Why Do you Want To Carry Cuffs?

What possible use for handcuffs would you have as a private citizen? You're not going to arrest anyone or take them into custody.

I don't know any peace officers who carry brass knuckles or blackjacks. My department issues OC and an ASP collapsible baton as less lethal options. I don't know what you mean about training being unavailable to private citizens. You probably just haven't looked hard enough for a training program. There was a thread here awhile back on ASP training for private citizens IIRC.

There are two schools of thoughts on less lethal options for the armed private citizen. One is that you should have a less lethal option available to you and move up and down the force continuum ladder. The other is that you are better off just having lethal force available to you and avoiding situations that may call for less force. I'm not an attorney so I won't comment on which school of thought is right for everyone.

Jeff
 
I want to carry cuffs for the simple reason I should be able to carry any damn thing I feel I have the need. When I have repoed cars there have been time Icould have used cuffs to keep a troublesome customer out of my way while I take their wheels back. That would make for some funny moments when I think about. Your statements show the arrogence of so many cops in particular the Yankee cops I have run into. They have the crazy ideas they should have more authority than Joh Q. Public. personally I do belive if you let the good ole boys police the high crime getthos they could clean up the dirt real fast.
 
Cowboypreacher,

Don't know what I said was arrogant, you take on a heck of a liability if you cuff someone and you have no arrest powers. You could be charged criminally for Unlawful Restraint, and the person could also sue you for big time money. Don't think it'd be a good idea to cuff someone whose car you were repoing.

As for who has more authority, that all depends on the laws in your state. Here in Illinois a private citizen has nearly the same authority as a peace officer. The private citizen can make an arrest on any crime that happens in their presence. A private citizen can't make an arrest on a crime they didn't witness. The kicker is that you aren't covered from civil action resulting from making a citizens arrest.

I have no problem with you carrying cuffs or anything else that's legal. I just don't know why you'd need them, especially given the climate we live in regarding civil suits.

There was a thread he a few years ago on those CCW badges you can buy in the back of the gun rags. If you combine a CCW badge, a handgun, other weapon and handcuffs, you will probably be looked at as a possibly dangerous wannabe by officers you encounter. Don't take that as a superior attitude, it's just an officer safety issue. Unless the officer knows you personally, he has no idea who you are or what you are doing with all the tools of a peace officer.

Jeff
 
In Kalifornia, a private citizen can't own ASP batons, OC spray over 2 oz, air TASERS, Pepperballs, saps, billyclubs, knuckles, nunchakus, PR-28s, and most other non-firearm weaponry.

Don't even get me started on the gun laws here. :barf:

I remember seeing a story on TV about how some cali cops took out a blind person who whipped out the folding cane they carry. Thought it was nunchakus. Is THAT stupid or what?

As for cuffs, forget it, too "wannabe cop". Use large zipties instead. Cheaper, disposable, and you can carry one in the pant leg seam of your pants without it being found in a patdown. :) In case that ever comes up.
 
So you think Sipowicz is Arrogant?

It seems to me that a LEO, who by the nature of their job and their responsibility "To Serve and To Protect", ought to have special weapons available to them to handle BG's they confront on a daily basis. Joe citizen working in a convenience store is in harm's way by the nature of his job, but he doesn't have to go chasing BG's or break into crack dens. And a baton doesn't do much good when the BG is willing to kill for the change in the register and is 5 feet away on the other side of the counter.

Also, LEO's are trained and qualify in the use of force and aggression. And they're closely supervised from the time they're Rookies 'til retirement. The guys buying Bushmasters at gun shows aren't held to the same standards.

The second amendment says you have a right to bear arms. In my mind, if you wanted an F-16, you should be able to carry Sidewinders and garage it. Practically speaking, I'd rather have a .45 and not drive into known areas of ill will.

Preacher, I live alot farther South than you, and I can tell you, we respect LEO's in our neighborhood. If anyone needs to be dis'ed, it's Osama and his buddies.

If you wanna carry an assortment of weapons, join the Seals or the Sheriff's department. If you want to cuff someone, find a young lady who likes it kinky.
 
Last edited:
Not all states have outlawed cuffs. You might get some weird responses if you are searched, but are they really illegal? They are not weapons at all, and citizens can make arrests under certain circumstances.
It seems to me that a LEO, who by the nature of their job and their responsibility "To Serve and To Protect", ought to have special weapons available to them to handle BG's they confront on a daily basis.
Click to expand...
That is exactly what gun control is based on. Citizens can protect themselves with oven spray or karate. Leave the guns and knives to "professionals".

Back to the original post though. I totally agree. It is absurd that you can carry a pistol, but you can get in a heap of trouble for a knife or baton. However, using a knife, baton, or brass knuckles will probably be considered the use of deadly force anyway. Why not just shoot 'em and avoid giving your attacker a chance?
 
Gun Control

I am far from being a gun control Nazi. I am in favor of Gun Training. I sell knives at many gun and knife shows. One of the guys who sets up close to me sells Bushmasters. You should see the people buying them! Look like the lead characters from "Night of the Living Dead". And, when the adrenaline is fired up and a shoot/don't shoot situation arises, chances are this guy won't be able to clear a jam or may take out his neighbor rather than the BG.

So, not only do we let him loose with an AR-15, we give him a knife, baton, flamethrower, stungun and mace. And when he shoots, beats, ignites, electrocutes or fogs someone, the 24-hour news services have a field day and we have further attempts to restrict our Second Amendment rights.

That is exactly what gun control is based on. Citizens can protect themselves with oven spray or karate. Leave the guns and knives to "professionals.

I'm not suggesting that only professionals have weapons. I'm suggesting that weapon wielders have training.
 
Last edited:
But you said that the police should have special weapons. Why is an officer's life worth more than mine?
 
On a pure philoshophical basis, we are all equal. But a LEO's job is to protect hundreds your job is to protect you and yours.

Again, I think you have a right under the Second Amendment to own whatever you please. But if you brandish it, it should be for self-defense. And if you're not trained someone may take it from you.

Personally, I'm more cautious when I carry than when I don't. Carrying puts a level of responsibility on me that I don't always feel like dealing with. I'd rather be able to yell back then back off at times. Carrying makes this more difficult.
 
Again, I think you have a right under the Second Amendment to own whatever you please.
Click to expand...
That's exactly how I feel. I just didn't like the mention of "special" weapons together with any branch of government. A tactic the anti's once tried was to say that the 2nd ammendment only applied to muzzleloaders for citizens, since that was the newest technology when the Bill of Rights was written. Just about all that shut them up was explaining that that would mean that the 1st ammendment only applied to quills and 18th century printing equipment; no modern/electric equipment whatsoever.

All that aside, welcome to TFL, Boris. Glad to have you aboard.
 
Carry what you want.If a store will sell it to you then don't feel so guilty.As long as you're using it in a defensive situation then what's to worry about?Many people carry handguns illegally for the same reason.I personally don't see a need for civilians to own handcuffs other than for the bedroom but if you want to risk a lawsuit them by all means carry them.I carry an ASP in a state that doesn't allow them but I'm not worried because it would only be used in a non-lethal defensive situation that would prevent me from escaping harm and risk having my CCW taken and used on me.My state is so bad that ASP's,stun guns OC spray are illegal to own for the civilian.What the hell kind of state doesn't allow it's citizens to protect themselve with non-lethal weapons?!You'd think that a state that is raping our rights of handgun ownership that they would at least let people carry a stun gun or pepper spray:mad:

The moral of my story is f#@k 'em.Carry what you want at your own risk.
 
In TN, you can carry pepper spray if you want, and you can carry a baton only after being certified (and you have to have a handgun permit first, which I don't understand). Slapjacks, knuckles, and auto knives are illegal for us non-LEOS.

Personally, I am against carrying cuffs for the reason that if I am in the situation where I have to cuff someone, than I'm most likely in a situation where I have to defend myself with a gun or baton anyways. And considering I'm physically small, I'm definitely not going to tackle and cuff an unruly person who may be drunk or high. I'll keep my distance and defend myself with my gun if need be.

To handcuff someone may be considered unlawful restraint, though I think "citizen's arrest" may take care of that (I'm NOT a lawyer). But, it must be warned, if you place someone under citizen's arrest, than you are 100% responsible for that person and have to maintain his well-being - should this person die or receive injuries under your "care", than you are 100% legally responsible.
 
Yes, a police officer is supposed to confront hostile bad guys but I have to travel the same streets with the bad guys. why should he have access to tools that I can't have? I don't have immediate access to several heavily armed, trained co-workers to back me up so I have greater need to special weapons than he don't I. I have to do far more to summon the help available to the average street cop, all he has to do is push the panic button and he has all officers in the area rushing to his aid running lights and siren. He is likely to have a handgun, possibly a shotgun or carbine, mace, baton, several hours training on each system available, body armor and the previously mentioned radio. Why does the officer have need of special weapons? I on the other hand will likely be alone without any form of assistance, no backup IF I can call them, no K9, no SWAT team. Just me, alone, so who needs the specialized tools here? Generally the police are only involved after a crime is comitted, for all the good they do they are essentially reactive. No victim, no crime, no need for the cop.
 
Jake,

A police officer is expected to intervene in situations that may not call for deadly force. A private citizen may have the option of retreating. Most often the "special tools" as you call them are used to force compliance during an arrest. They aren't really often used in a reactive mode to an attack. Often the officer "causes" the confrontation by his presence or some action he has to take in the course of his duties.

Perhaps all states should be as enlightened as Kentucky, which issues a "Concealed Deadly Weapons" permit that covers everything from handguns to knives. I have no problem with anyone carrying or possessing "things". After all it's what they do with them that makes things dangerous. And since it's impossible to stop people from doing harm by banning the carry or possesion of "things" I think the laws are pretty stupid. But unfortunately, our political servants seem to think they are effective or at least that the majority of the voting public is stupid enough to believe they are effective.

Personally, it's your choice. If you think you need a less lethal option, go for it. I'd recommend OC. Get the stuff with the highest Scoville Heat Unit Rating you can find. The advantage of being a private citizen and using OC is that you can spray and run :D peace officers then have to handle the suspect to cuff, pat down and transport. You invariably get a good second hand contamination yourself.

The only thing discussed here that I have a problem with a private citizen carrying is cuffs. I still can see no need to restrain a subject after a defensive encounter. As I said in an earlier post, you open yourself to all sorts of criminal and civil liability with cuffs. You'd be in BIG trouble in most places I know of if you handcuffed someone while you repossesed his vehicle.

Jeff
 
Jeff I was only half serious with my post, I was trying to stir up a friend of mine here. It bothers me when I hear police officers refer to 'civilians', they seem to forget that they too are civilians. It is that mentality that bothers me. I like what you tell me about Kentucky. It does bother me that there are laws in many states that do not allow, or seriously restrict, nonlethal defense weapons. Without the less lethal alternatives, well, we know what can/will happen. The private citizen needs the same options available to defend himself that the officer (public citizen?) needs to do his job. I agree that there is a problem with 'posers' who want to act like police for whatever reason but I do know an individual who carrys handcuffs with a unique bit of reasoning. He is an older guy, 71 years I think, with asthma. He was a serious martial artist and shooter for over 25 years and is still more than just competent. He carrys the cuffs because, he reasoned, if he defends himself successfuly without killing someone he will handcuff them because when the adrenaline wears off he will have a hard time breathing and during this time is at greater risk because of it. He does not want to be attacked again while he is in respitory distress. I try not to question why anyone has what they have because my preconcieved notions have been challenged in the past.

Once again I hope I didn't want to work people up with that post, well, only one person. But I think there is a valid point to be had in all this.
 
Jake,
No problem with what you've said. :) What is the non-offensive term we should use to refer to citizens not in the employ of a police agency and those that are? I agree that "civilians" isn't quite right, but for the sake of discussion we sometimes need to differentiate between the two.

I suppose your friend could use his asthma as an affirmative defense against an unlawful restraint charge. I rather doubt that Cowboypreacher could use repossesing a car in the same way.

I still think we should regulate actions, not tools. Unfortunately in many states, as soon as a new defensive tool hits the market, the legislature wants to run out and ban it. Sometimes it doesn't even take that, scary conduct in a movie or TV show is enough to start legislation rolling.

Jeff
 
I noticed someone wrote if I want carry a assortment of weapons join the military or the police. I say why should I? It was also said the cops are regulated from rookie to retirement, but the average Joe is not. How is that a bad thing? I mean when it comes to dealing with crime my family figured it ou real good during the Hatfield an McCoy fued. I have people on both sides and when they were wronged they did not cry to the local fuzz. They found the offending party and shot them dead. That is how I view the police with disdain. They think because that got a badge they are God. It is people like me that have to take back the power and return it to the people. God Bless the South!!!
 
Cowboy,
Buy what you can afford and take yer chances. I work part-time as a deputy sheriff and we don't have the leeway you seem to think on weapons. We aren't authorized to carry blackjacks or brass knuckles at all. Carrying any kind of "fighting knife" (e.g. double edged) on duty is like asking for administrative reprimand. We can carry batons and pepper spray only after completing the required training in their use. We can carry only the specific handgun(s), subject to dept. regs, with which we qualified. We are authorized to use dept. long guns only if we complete qualification.
I question your apparent fascination with handcuffs. How were you proposing to handcuff the owners of the cars you were attempting to repo? Angry people tend to resist being cuffed. Sometimes they have to be pepper sprayed and/or struck with a baton or otherwise subdued first. Were you going to do one or more of those things first?
Also, why do you keep attempting to make this a North/South thing? You whiff very stongly of troll, IMO.
 
Handcuffs are a pain in the tuchkis. To put them on someone, you and your weapons literally have to get within cuddling distance of the person.

Your handcuffee gets rambunctious, and it can actually be easier for him to grab your weapons than it is for you to grab your weapons.

Improperly applied handcuffs have the potential to maim, cripple or kill the person they are applied to.

Improperly applied handcuffs have the potential to maim, cripple of kill the person trying to apply the handcuffs.

You want to carry handcuffs, have at it.

My thought on the matter is: if you carry them, sooner or later you're gonna want to justify the carry of the dratted things. Which means you're going to be looking for a reason to 'cuff someone.

Which means that someone is going to get hurt/killed/sued.

But that's your lookout -- as long as you accept responsibility for your actions.

LawDog
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top