“Next-generation handcuffs deliver electric shocks, drugs to detainees”

How can these be legal to use? What is the sense in applying taser charges to detainees who are already in cuffs? And, where in the constitution does it give law enforcement the right to administer drugs to people in shackles?

Who are they designed to be used on? I got lots of questions.

From Digital Trends:


The handcuffs have been designed to deliver a shock between between 20,000 and 150,000 volts and between 0.5 and 6 milliamps. The duration of the shock can last from 0.5 and 10 seconds. In addition, the shock can be delivered in a constant jolt or at an intermittent frequency.

In addition to the electrodes, the patent details a “substance delivery system” that’s 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, it’s likely that the device will record instances where substances are delivered to detainees.’

Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to “Next-generation handcuffs deliver electric shocks, drugs to detainees”

  1. messup says:

    There are some considerations regarding this “unlawful” use of restraint in the USA.

    1) the President has suspended Habeus Corpus in the USA. Martial Law is the norm.Unlawful use of Executive Orders.
    2) Criminal attitude and behavior by and for (in the name of national security) all US governance is pervasive. US government is in and of itself a criminal enterprise.
    3) Extensive drug trafficking throughout all USA is pervasive and growing…both in and outside US law enforcement entities.
    4) Disturbed mental patients (who should have been in a national data bank of identified, heavily medicated and possibly substance abusers/addicts)adequately cared for and under medical observation has long ago been legislated away. But some states struggle to implement such programs.
    5) Pathological Criminal behavior, defying normal remedies and incarceration techniques, would warrant “use of force” above and beyond “existing security force techniques.” Sitting chair restraints already in widespread use in all of law enforcement.

    Not condoning these restraints, merely stating a “police state” mentality already “self evident” and pervasive across all USA. Drones, security cameras, undercover “security personnel,” black helicopters, satellite surveillance, more and more “invasion of privacy” issues, pervasive electronic surveillance, individual tracking devices, etc. are all in existance today. America of the 50’s is but a book cover…literally gone forever. Pray. Amen.

  2. notamobster says:

    Messup – “black helicopters”?

    As for the restraints, I can’t think of any instance these would be necessary. Once someone is restrained, they can still be a threat, but electro-synaptic interruption is absolutely unnecessary. Besides, with the close proximity of the electrodes you’re not interrupting the synapses, you’re merely using pain compliance.

    Subject control spray is quite effective in most cases. Isolation & restraint works in other cases. Either way, electric shock is almost always unnecessary when the subject is cuffed.

  3. R.D. Walker says:

    So let me see it I understand. Pouring water on the face of the mastermind of 9/11 in order to prevent other such attacks is a crime against humanity. Shocking and drugging a garden variety suspect who is already restrained by remote control, on the other hand, is just swell.

    World. Gone. Mad.