Police in Canada may need classes on wearing assault gloves

[johndoe3]

http://www.guns.com/2017/03/22/police-i ... lt-gloves/

??gloves are weapons??

The Ontario government in Canada is asking police chiefs across the province to ask their officers to stop wearing ‘assault gloves’ until they are classified as either protection or weapons.

The particular gloves in question, although there are similar models by other brands, are Oakley SI Assault Gloves. They are not issued by police departments, but are worn by officers who purchase them on their own. The knuckles feature re-inforced material, much like bicycle or motorcycle gloves.

...Police groups are confused as to how reinforced gloves can be considered weapons. They say officers wear them as a form of protection from weapons, or as a tool to gain entry and that there is no specific training on their use. Officers don’t need approval or permission to wear protective equipment since they are not classified as weapons.

The Special Investigations Unit says that if gloves are classified as weapons, officers will be required to have special training on how to use them. They are also pushing for police training on how to identify mental illness, and how to proceed with an arrest when it is detected.

I'm with the rank and file policemen on this issue--who needs a stinking class on wearing gloves?

[fishman]

It seems everything these days is about dodging liability

[whiterussian1974]

Are Canadian Police allowed to wear shoelaces? lol
After all, they COULD be converted to use as Garrotes.

[a_canadian]

They're not just gloves guys. Oakley Assault gloves have a moulded carbon fiber knuckle band which is effectively the same as brass knuckles. In the case cited, the crazy man was beaten to death with three blows to the head by an officer wearing one of these gloves. Are brass knuckles okay for police in the USA to use on citizens? Seems unlikely.

[TROOPER]

They're not just gloves guys. Oakley Assault gloves have a moulded carbon fiber knuckle band which is effectively the same as brass knuckles. In the case cited, the crazy man was beaten to death with three blows to the head by an officer wearing one of these gloves. Are brass knuckles okay for police in the USA to use on citizens? Seems unlikely.

And?

The gloves didn't beat anyone to death, the cop did. And - big surprise - it's illegal to beat someone to death.

You're not saying it, but you're implying it: if it can be misused, it ought to be governed. Like shin-guards, or baseball bats, or fishing line, or just plain-ol'-boots.

Once you've rapped your knuckles on enough exterior surfaces you'll eventually figure out that they need to be protected. I guess some of us learn slower than others.

[doubloon]

...it's illegal to beat someone to death.
...

Without cause.

At any rate, sure gloves can be weapons and so can just about anything else. I agree, making the "weapon" illegal when there's already a law against excessive force won't prevent the crime.

[whiterussian1974]

We had the same Issue with Flashlights being substituted as batons in the USA.

ONLY when so employed, do they b/c Blunt Trauma Instruments. Because of the "manner of their Use." Not because they "CAN" be used that way.

The result, some Agencies now actually teach how to beat Suspects and Witnesses w MagLightes. lol

That was part of my Blunt Object Training that I received when learning about riot batons; as well as Dept Policy on Rocks, Scissors, Paper. Oops. I'm starting to sound like a schoolchild at his favorite game. Well, we've been dumbed-down to behave that way.

But seriously, we have Training concerning "improvised Weapons" and their use as it conforms to Dept Policy and State/Federal Laws.

[Fulmen]

making the "weapon" illegal when there's already a law against excessive force won't prevent the crime.

I think you're missing the point.

Imagine a person properly trained in unarmed combat. Equip him with something equivalent to a brass knuckle without any additional training. Now imagine what happens when he gets into a physical (but not life-threatening) altercation... A knock-out blow could easily become a scull-cracking blow, right?

[TROOPER]

making the "weapon" illegal when there's already a law against excessive force won't prevent the crime.

I think you're missing the point.

Imagine a person properly trained in unarmed combat. Equip him with something equivalent to a brass knuckle without any additional training. Now imagine what happens when he gets into a physical (but not life-threatening) altercation... A knock-out blow could easily become a scull-cracking blow, right?

Considering the cop in question has a baton, a taser, OC pepper-spray, and a fuqin' gun, we're worried about gloves? No steel-toe footwear either? God forbid someone should protect their foot if it also means they can kick someone a little harder.

Forest for the trees.

[doubloon]

making the "weapon" illegal when there's already a law against excessive force won't prevent the crime.

I think you're missing the point.

Imagine a person properly trained in unarmed combat. Equip him with something equivalent to a brass knuckle without any additional training. Now imagine what happens when he gets into a physical (but not life-threatening) altercation... A knock-out blow could easily become a scull-cracking blow, right?

I'm not sure whose point I'm missing but if training is required for these then regulations, restrictions and required training for motorcycle gloves is next.

The point is redundant legislation can be passed ad infinitum and still not prevent the crime.

Regulation needed on steel toe boots to prevent kicking someone to death, maybe some legislation on flashlights or broomsticks while we're at it.