Video Hackers Hack Handcuffs at H.O.P.E. (Video) 172
Video no longer available.
Have you ever been handcuffed and wish you weren't? Even if you haven't, what if you plan to demonstrate at a political party convention in the next couple of weeks? Either way, you need to watch this video, shot by Timothy Lord and unknown_lamer at H.O.P.E. (Hackers on Planet Earth), which will teach you the rudiments of unhandcuffing yourself -- but on purpose leaves out the fine points. For those, you'll need to buy several pairs of handcuffs and practice on your own. At worst, you will probably embarrass yourself no more than Timothy does as he tries to shimmy his handcuffed hands from behind him to in front of him, starting at about 5:18.
Usually when I'm handcuffed, it's by choice! (Score:1)
Video...?` (Score:2)
I looked at all 3x links in the article, and didn't see the video on any of them....
Rick-roll Alert! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I like the way that my comment cruised up to 5: informative when people with a sense of humour (poor guy clicking for a fourth time) GOT the joke, then loads of people going "no, this is slashdot. this is getting in the way of my beard growing time" shit. hats off to the people who ranked it as informative. you guys :-D
come on (Score:5, Insightful)
I am so sick of partial info that "leaves out the finer points". If you want to make good information, include ALL of the information.
Ah, there it is! (Score:5, Insightful)
I clicked every link in the post twice before I realized where to find the video...
And now I know what it's like for grandma to "surf the Internets".
Re: (Score:3)
Ah, back in the good old days where, when you saw "watch this video" it was a hyperlink, clearly telling you where the video was located.
Now that we have abusive ads all over the place and all run flash blockers, but everyone likes to do embedded videos because clicking on links is so old fashioned, none of us can tell when TFV is anymore.
Handcuffs at a large protest...not! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is much harder to move your hands in front of you when detained with zip ties. The chain between the cuffs allows a gap that makes getting your ass between your forearms much easier.
Re:Handcuffs at a large protest...not! (Score:5, Informative)
Uh, no...they're not (harder to escape from). I can show you (as can a little Google'ing) how to escape from even the stoutest of zip-cuffs in under 1 second. Doesn't mater if you're cuffed front or back. This was (and I'm certain still is) standard training for SOC, SERE and Counter Intel in the military (where I was taught) and is common knowledge (apparently not as common as I thought however). Do yourself a favor and head on over to ITS Tactical and you can see an instruction video from one of my buddies on how to properly 'pop' zip-cuffs with one fluid motion.
Re:Handcuffs at a large protest...not! (Score:4, Interesting)
Uh, no...they're not (harder to escape from). I can show you (as can a little Google'ing) how to escape from even the stoutest of zip-cuffs in under 1 second. Doesn't mater if you're cuffed front or back. This was (and I'm certain still is) standard training for SOC, SERE and Counter Intel in the military (where I was taught) and is common knowledge (apparently not as common as I thought however). Do yourself a favor and head on over to ITS Tactical and you can see an instruction video from one of my buddies on how to properly 'pop' zip-cuffs with one fluid motion.
only problem is that law enforcement doesn't use home depot zip cuffs (primarily because these can cut into your wrists in really nasty ways if you struggle) but special models which (besides having rounded edges and being pretty expensive) are also much harder to break or shim your way out of.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And this is why they use zip-ties now. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Handcuffs are just for restraining drunks. For the real dangerous folks (protesters, students, etc) you use zip ties.
On the other hand, I recall seeing a video a short time ago in which a person volunteered to be zip-tied so they could demonstrate breaking them. It seemed to consist of getting your wrists beneath your backside and forcefully squatting down to snap them. I could be recalling the details wrong, but you can surely find a youtube video of people demonstrating this technique that would presumably not work with handcuffs unless they were already materially compromised in some way.
Re: (Score:2)
I recall seeing a video a short time ago in which a person volunteered to be zip-tied so they could demonstrate breaking them. It seemed to consist of getting your wrists beneath your backside and forcefully squatting down to snap them.
Snap your wrists or the ties?
Re: (Score:3)
GP did not choose the right words. If you did what exactly GP describe you will hurt you wrist and the zip tie still wouldnt break. It is more like with full force bring your arms down on you knees or on your back (with a slight force that pushes the arms away from each other), and the right time increase the force that pulls the arms away from each (this will automatically happen when you hit your knees or your back). You will feel no pain and the zip tie will break.
Re: (Score:2)
standard zip ties can be broken by overloading. There are zip ties which have non-return metal ratchets against the plastic which are practically impossible to defeat without a purpose-made shim or a pair of sidecutters. As these are designed to hold things like submarine cables they're not really suitable for restraint, in fact can be dangerous, so they're not used.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
hogtie is an illegal restraint technique, as it's been associated with positional asphyxia. Most military and law enforcement agencies these days actively warn against using the hogtie as a restraint because of this.
That said, it is used on children by State workers in what is termed an acceptable use of restraint according to the MAPPA (Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements) guidelines. Quite how restraining a minor to the point where they cannot draw breath and go into terminal acidosis is beyond me
Re: (Score:2)
Cute Hack (Score:3)
But like many hacks, notable for being interesting rather than useful, since cops who need to restrain a lot of people at once use plastic ties, not handcuffs. For an applicable hack see the lastest episode of Breaking Bad [amazon.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? Don't you have fuses in the US?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure Walt was careful not to let the wires touch. The resistance of the strap would have prevented a short.
Or you can .... (Score:2)
...use a key.
Re: (Score:2)
For info on where to get one...... If I have to tell you then you don't need one... or you don't deserve one.
Re: (Score:2)
...use a key.
Or a paper clip. Which of course IS a key once you finish bending it.
Re: (Score:2)
...use a key.
Agreed. The shimming only works if they don't double lock them. And they always double lock them.
So, if you are going to hide a shim on you, you may as well just hide a key.
Hey, Slashdot... Don't Bother Embedding Video! (Score:2)
JUST LINK TO VIDEOS, DON'T TRY TO EMBED. You are doing your readers a disservice. Just add a link and let people watch off the original server. It works far better.
Re: (Score:2)
Bad move, Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is a different issue, but just as bad. Slashdot should know better than to allow such a thing on their site.
What's the escalation in penalties? (Score:4, Informative)
So let's say you're illegally protesting (without a permit, disturbing bystanders, not disbursing..etc) and you get cuffed by the cops.
What's the increase in penalties vs. just staying cuffed? ... a bit of research later...
Seems that you can spend up to a year in jail [onecle.com] for what is now a misdemeanor, as opposed to getting a ticket for the infraction.
Re:What's the escalation in penalties? (Score:4, Informative)
"Seems that you can spend up to a year in jail for what is now a misdemeanor, as opposed to getting a ticket for the infraction."
Resisting arrest has always carried relatively harsh penalties. Theoretically, though, you have to do it actively (struggle or try to escape), as opposed to passively (sitting down or lying limp).
Re: (Score:2)
It's not something I would recommend. But still.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seems the Northern California chapter of the ACLU [aclunc.org] has some information if you plan on participating in a "sit in".
Even they tell you to understand the law. I can't imagine the ACLU advocating that "breaking out of your handcuffs" would further your cause.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the increase in penalties vs. just staying cuffed? ...
No disrespect but: What's the point? If you're allowing yourself to be jailed, you've just changed it from:
Getting cuffed. Going to jail.
...to...
Getting cuffed. Getting cuffed again. Going to jail.
I could see busting out the cuffs if you're going to walk away, but what does picking the cuffs do except piss off the cops? (And, as you've pointed out, increase your legal exposure.)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd have to say that when I spent hours in cuffs after being arrested at a political demonstration, I was very jealous of the guy next to me who had released himself from the zip ties. When we arrived at the jail, he just handed the flex cuffs to the deputy and nothing unique happened to him that didn't happen to everyone else. I had tingling in my pinkies for an hour or so.
Under certain circumstances, de-arrest is possible, which could be a vast improvement in your situation.
Torrent Link (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is a different video (and a better one). The video attached to the summary, is at tool demonstration desk and not a talk.
Good idea. (Score:2)
Yes, teach people how to go from being arrested for committing a misdemeanor which might amount to time served and might be dismissed to committing several felonies which can earn one a stiff fine, a lengthy jail sentence or prison time, and possibly get them shot in the process. Wonderful idea, keep up the good work.
Handcuffs? Not a problem. (Score:2)
Just don't forget your safe word.
If you're handcuffed by the Feds... (Score:2)
none of this will work. (Don't ask how I know...)
When the U.S. Marshals cuff you for transport, you get leg irons plus handcuffs plus a key-locked box placed over the handcuffs so you can't get access to the handcuffs at all. Good luck getting out of that unless you're Houdini (or at least well-trained in escape magic and have the proper tools secreted up your butt.)
However, local cops do screw up. A handcuff key stuffed in a money belt behind you is quite likely to be missed in a frisk, even if they suspec
Re: (Score:2)
You mean they do work, but not necessarily to escape (which depends on the situation, and whether you know weakest moments). Got it.
This seems unwise (Score:2)
Seems like a monumentally bad idea to try to get out of cuffs. I've been told by a deputy friend that as soon as one cuff is still on your wrist, and the other is hanging, you now have possession of a deadly weapon.
As for the keys, How much you wanna bet that they can't make a "possession of burglary tools" charge stick if you're carrying lock picks of any kind?
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome to The Whole Point, brought to you by anarchist OWS types who want to see people die.
Re: (Score:2)
HOPE's been around a lot longer than OWS.
Re:Handcuffs (Score:5, Funny)
At worst, you will probably embarrass yourself no more than Timothy does as he tries
"Do or do not. There is no try." — Yoda
Re: (Score:2)
"Rudiments". Sure I know!
They're the OPPOSITE of "Sentiments"!
I did not kill my wife (Score:2)
I did not kill my wife and then jump into the waterfall.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are plenty of legitimate good reasons to learn how to free yourself from handcuffs. One of them is being able to call for rescue when your BDSM-obsessed girlfriend has an epileptic seizure after cuffing you up. Oh, sorry, you losers don't have girlfriends.
This is Slashdot, that is a given for anyone who posts here. Hey, I see that includes you!
Re:Why Is This Here?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Free clue - The police don't always act in our best interests.
They occasionally cuff people, throw 'em in a cage, and abandon them for days at a time. They occasionally cuff people and then beat the poor helpless bastard silly, claiming "resistance" (which if they want to claim it, at least you should have the ability to defend yourself and earn the extra charges). They occasionally torture handcuffed hippies by pepper-spray coated q-tips to the eyes.
The more ways we have to defend ourselves against the bad ones (which for the sake of argument, I'll pretend count as the minority), the better.
Now what? (Score:2)
They occasionally cuff people, throw 'em in a cage, and abandon them for days at a time. They occasionally cuff people and then beat the poor helpless bastard silly, claiming "resistance" ...
and once you break free of your handcuffs the cops are going to turn all sweetness and light?
remember those old S.W.A.T games where you were taught to restrain everyone caught up in a raid, suspects, hostages and innocent bystanders alike --- or risk losing control of the situation?
you should have the ability to defend yourself and earn the extra charges
assume you survive being tasered, clubbed, choked, or shot by a cop whose entire training is focused on bringing you down quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
YMMV. I'll agree it annoys me that the glossed over "the finer points", but a lot of people tend to just assume "you can't do it" until they see someone else succeed. Knowing you can do it often counts as 99% of the challenge.
and ignores the fact that zip ties are used far more than handcuffs for restrainng people these days.
We all know how to get out of plasticuffs already (worst case, you can weaken them enough with a few good rubs against rough concrete to j
Re: (Score:3)
Except it doesn't teach you anything and ignores the fact that zip ties are used far more than handcuffs for restrainng people these days. It's just another dumb video of timothy wanking around and the editors thinking this stupid shit will somehow stem the tide of user loss.
Zip ties use the same principle as handcuffs and a shim is equally as effective. If you're going to bash Timothy, you should at least try not to look like an idiot.
Re: (Score:3)
Except it doesn't teach you anything and ignores the fact that zip ties are used far more than handcuffs for restrainng people these days.
As wikipedia says, [citation needed]. Zip ties are only used for those rare occasions that they need to cuff dozens of suspects at once. If you get DUI, they're not going to use zip ties, they'll use plain old reuseable handcuffs. For ordinary arrests, handcuffs are much cheaper, since they're reusable.
Re: (Score:3)
That's silly. Many of us know how to do all kinds of illegal things, because there are other reasons to know them, or even for no reason at all.
I'm sure you know quite a few things that could get you in trouble, but don't do anything illegal with that information.
Re: (Score:3)
"I'm sure you know quite a few things that could get you in trouble, but don't do anything illegal with that information."
Some people just don't get that knowledge is valuable, and the same knowledge can be used by the occasional criminal for evil, but at the same time used by the majority, for doing good.
"That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved." -- Benjamin Franklin, letter to Benjamin Vaughan, March 14, 1785.
Re: (Score:2)
The things I am not supposed to know are the most interesting to me, because they're important enough that someone thinks I shouldn't know them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There is no such thing as bad knowledge, only bad uses for knowledge.
Re: (Score:3)
Not everyone lives in the Utopia of the United States of America where handcuffs are only applied with lovingkindness and for indisputable reasons of Social Good.
Re: (Score:2)
Why bother? I for one look forward to the Paulites schooling the whole convention in Robert's Rules the same way they did in Maine and Nevada. That'll make for much better entertainment (and a presidential candidate for whom I might actually want to vote) than watching the media butcher another round of Occupiers by asking them "hard" questions like "what do you want."
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they got the "Anonymous Coward" part right on that one.
Re: (Score:3)
FUCK YOU, OCCUTARDS!
Eat shit and die, Koch, you goddamned evil son of a bitch.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And again, the burden of student loans is not even in the same ballpark as the imposed British tyranny and taxation that sparked the Revolution.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember, as I perused the promissory note, I was told I would get a copy so I could read it later. Fat lot of good that does me AFTER I sign it.
Re:Handcuffs... (Score:4, Interesting)
" They knew how much debt they would be incurring, and under what interest rate they'd have to pay. "
But here is what many of them did not know, when they made future plans and started their post-secondary education:
(1) That the government would progressively tighten the terms and time limits for repaying the loans.
(2) That the government would progressively reduce grants and direct loans, and rely on more private loans at higher interest rates.
(3) That the economy would crash due to Wall Street greed and government collusion in same, and that they would not be able to find a decent job for years, if then.
(4) That the government would change the rules about defaults. Many of today's M.D.s and Ph.D.s defaulted on their student loans... and go unpenalized. Yet today, a liberal-arts or business graduate, with far lower debt but who can't finde a decent job, finds him- or herself in a position in which the loan can never be forgiven, bankruptcy is not an option, and their tax returns (if any) are seized by the government every year unless and until the loans are paid off.
No, they didn't necessarily know all this going in, because the government changed it gradually, year after year.
Re: (Score:2)
An agreement only one side can change whenever they desire is no agreement at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, how does an M.D. or Ph. D get to default on a loan without penalty.
This is relevant to my interests.
Re: (Score:2)
"Wait, how does an M.D. or Ph. D get to default on a loan without penalty."
I don't think they can, anymore. That was my point. Things were a lot different when they were in school.
Which is why a lot of old-schoolers should be more careful with their criticisms. The world is a much different place today.
Re: (Score:2)
"Wait, how does an M.D. or Ph. D get to default on a loan without penalty."
Here is one of the reasons, to be more specific:
Once upon a time, declaring bankruptcy could free you from your student loans. But not today.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why the 'in' thing to do these days is to keep really good credit throughout college, spend marginally and, upon graduation, have a nest egg to put towards a house to live in for the next 7 years.
Then, put as much if not all of your student loan debt on credit cards and stop paying them.
Re: (Score:2)
"That's why the 'in' thing to do these days is to keep really good credit throughout college, spend marginally and, upon graduation, have a nest egg to put towards a house to live in for the next 7 years."
At first I thought that either you didn't read my original comment, or you completely missed my point.
I will repeat in different words: MANY of the students GP was criticizing found that the circumstances that were prevailing when they PLANNED and started college, were not the same once they graduated. Because over that time, the rules have changed.
While they were in school, they were faced with the choice of either biting the bullet and accepting the new, changed circumstances, and hoping for the bes
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I understood your full post. I was hit by it, myself. I doubled under on the course load and got done in 3 years, paying the excess over loans out of pocket to avoid the drastic changes.
There was a short period of time there where, if you were making regular student loan payments (ie $100 here and there) while in school, when you got out, you'd immediately get slammed with CC offers. There was a point in time when I had 3 or 4 different Visa cards, for instance. An unscrupulous person
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Every single person should have reasonable means of getting a good education.
It is so important that many nations consider it a basic human right.
Yes, that's why an English student in England is required to pay up to £9,000 a year to attend each course while a Scottish student in England isn't required to pay a penny (yes, makes fuck all sense but there it is).
That includes progressing all the way to a master degree not being a significant financial investment.
Before you ask, no spending decades to get one or a whole bunch of them wouldn't be covered by that.
It's been the same for as long as I can remember. Every English person I know who has gone through an English university has finished up an average £40k in debt. This is not isolated. I'm sure it is a similar story elsewhere.
Its simply one of the easiest ways to allow everyone to move socially upwards - or - downwards based on their own achievements.
Limiting the means of your people to aquire education is somewhere between extremely shortsighted, outright evil or in violation of human rights.
...What, the UK is the yardstick in respecting Human Right
1/3 supported revolution ... (Score:2)
You do know the amount of people that were for the American revolution was very small, ...
No. About 1/3 of the Colonials supported the revolution. That is a large number. That is literally about the percentage that are registered Democrats or registered Republicans according to a recent survey.
Re: (Score:2)
"About 1/3 of the Colonials supported the revolution. That is a large number. That is literally about the percentage that are registered Democrats or registered Republicans according to a recent survey."
Which leaves the remaining 1/3 just about ready to revolt against the Democrats and Republicans.
Sounds about right.
Re: (Score:2)
"About 1/3 of the Colonials supported the revolution. That is a large number. That is literally about the percentage that are registered Democrats or registered Republicans according to a recent survey."
Which leaves the remaining 1/3 just about ready to revolt against the Democrats and Republicans. Sounds about right.
Not really. The historical precedent would be the remaining 1/3 are neutral and not getting involved. Now that seems about "right".
"Right" as in accurate, not as in good.
Re: (Score:2)
"Not really. The historical precedent would be the remaining 1/3 are neutral and not getting involved. Now that seems about "right"."
Except that they aren't, so historical precedent does not necessarily apply.
And awful lot of the protesters are independent, and sick to their stomachs of the "Big 2" parties. Count on it.
Re: (Score:2)
"Not really. The historical precedent would be the remaining 1/3 are neutral and not getting involved. Now that seems about "right"."
Except that they aren't, so historical precedent does not necessarily apply. And awful lot of the protesters are independent, and sick to their stomachs of the "Big 2" parties. Count on it.
But few independents are "occupy protesters" or supporters of them. O implies I does not mean that I implies O. Occupy started strong but got off track with the camping thing and turned off many independents.
Re: (Score:2)
"But few independents are "occupy protesters" or supporters of them."
I think you are wrong, and on-site news interviews have tended to back me up. A lot of the protesters are liberals, but a lot of them are independents, too, regardless of whether that makes them strange bedfellows.
"O implies I does not mean that I implies O."
Of course. But that doesn't imply that I am wrong, either. Most independents and libertarians I know very strongly suport the Occupy movement, even if they aren't protesting themselves. Yet.
Re: (Score:2)
"But few independents are "occupy protesters" or supporters of them."
I think you are wrong, and on-site news interviews have tended to back me up. A lot of the protesters are liberals, but a lot of them are independents, too, regardless of whether that makes them strange bedfellows.
"O implies I does not mean that I implies O."
Of course. But that doesn't imply that I am wrong, either. Most independents and libertarians I know very strongly suport the Occupy movement, even if they aren't protesting themselves. Yet.
The first thing I ran across on Google:
November 2011. 24% of independents support the movement, down from previous surveys. 17% oppose. 20% approve of the way the protest is being conducted. 26% disapprove.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/150896/support-occupy-unchanged-criticize-approach.aspx [gallup.com]
The camping and confrontations with police are turning independents away from Occupy.
Re: (Score:2)
"November 2011. 24% of independents support the movement, down from previous surveys. 17% oppose. 20% approve of the way the protest is being conducted. 26% disapprove."
And that was 3 months into the movement, but 9 months ago. It's pretty hard to see how it has much relevance to today.
"The camping and confrontations with police are turning independents away from Occupy."
It might turn them away from the protests themselves, but I don't think it turns them away from at least tacit support of them.
I will repeat, with different emphasis: most independents and libertarians I know very strongly support the Occupy movement, even if they aren't protesting themselves. Maybe the ones you know are different.
Re: (Score:2)
Forgive me for interjecting, but: there's an Occupy movement, still? I thought that was sorta like the Oakland riots a couple months ago: just another Bay Area thing which spread wider, but quickly became indistinguishable from the ordinary homeless people in the area.
Wall Street reform is separate from Occupy ... (Score:2)
Our friend anecdotes are not much of a rebuttal against a formal survey conducted by a reputable organization like Gallop.
Re: (Score:2)
"Our friend anecdotes are not much of a rebuttal against a formal survey conducted by a reputable organization like Gallop."
No, but the fact that the Gallup poll was taken 3 months into the "movement", and that was 9 months ago, DOES call its validity into serious question.
The "occupy" movement didn't go away, although it's not actually "occupying" as much now. On the contrary. It has spread into an ongoing global phenomenon.
Re: (Score:2)
You're talking about two different things.
The Founders - the Jeffersons and Washingtons - who actively pushed for separation from England were in the minority. Something like 1% - I don't know that number to be true in this case, but it would fit historical context and precedent. One out of 100 or so would've been willing to do what's necessary at the local level to peacefully kick the British out.
That 1% just needed a spark to light the tinderbox, so to speak.
Then, when the "Revolution" started - the Redco
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think many were killed in the occupation of Boston originally, and the Boston Massacre and other incidents were really not the spark that started the armed
Re: (Score:2)
No, I was thinking of the initial occupation of Boston and the incurring Massacre. That was akin to the Assassination attempt of Ferdinand prior to WWI - not the actual event, per se, but everyone started cleaning their guns at that point.
What we're seeing today in US political life is, quite un-ironically due to the uh establishment of the Tea Party, not that far off what happened leading up to and including the Boston Tea Party.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, the revolutionaries may have been smaller in number, but that amounted to a greater percentage of the people. If even just 20 to 30 percent of the populous agrees with you, it's a lot easier to get stuff accomplished. Also, distance made the American revolution a lot easier for the people who lived here compared to those who lived on the other side of the ocean.
Re: (Score:2)
"Breaking news from 1962..... handcuffs can be opened without a key!"
More like 1562. Get with the times, man.
Re: (Score:2)
1962, lets see... I was 10 and practicing magic, so yes, hacking handcuffs for 50 years (although I haven't since I was 16 and demonstrated to a cop that I could. He was impressed).
And here I didn't think I was a hacker until I started repurposing hardware as a teenager!
Re: (Score:2)
And if you need to carry a tool to open handcuffs, why not just carry the tool designed for the job: a handcuff key?
Also, I'm not too keen on Elton's latest wig.