Slashdot Mirror


Hackers Hack Handcuffs at H.O.P.E. (Video)

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.

112 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. Usually when I'm handcuffed, it's by choice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Grrrrrowwwwlll!

  2. Re:Handcuffs by Anonymous Coward · · 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

  3. come on by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

  4. Re:Why Is This Here?? by JockTroll · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.

    --
    Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
  5. Brilliant by Sparticus789 · · Score: 1

    Breaking news from 1962..... handcuffs can be opened without a key!

    --
    sudo make me a sandwich
    1. Re:Brilliant by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Breaking news from 1962..... handcuffs can be opened without a key!"

      More like 1562. Get with the times, man.

    2. Re:Brilliant by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      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!

    3. Re:Brilliant by radio4fan · · Score: 1

      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.

  6. Re:Why Is This Here?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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.

    Pfft. Like any of us would want a girlfriend with such a generic fetish. Get with the times, man.

  7. Ah, there it is! by Anonymous Coward · · 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".

    1. Re:Ah, there it is! by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

      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.

  8. Handcuffs at a large protest...not! by kevmeister · · Score: 1

    At large operations where a lot of people are detained (or even arrested), handcuffs are not used. Too expensive and too bulky to have to use a couple hundred at a time. Zip ties (nylon cable ties) are used. They are both easier and harder to escape from than real handcuffs as they can be easily cut and can generally be opened with a paper clip, but it takes help and close physical access by the other party for these. (You could probably do it on your own if you can get the paper clip to your mouth and your hands in front of you, but it still would be very tricky as the target is small and you won't be able to see it in that position.)

    --
    Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
    1. Re:Handcuffs at a large protest...not! by berashith · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Handcuffs at a large protest...not! by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    3. Re:Handcuffs at a large protest...not! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This sort of thing is not meant for the determined fellow. It is meant for the normal fellow. 99% of the people out there will have no clue how to do it.

      It is crowd control. Zip-em, sit-em, watch-em, haul-em.

      I also 100% guarantee you pop one in front of an officer will be bringing out the night stick. So be prepared for a beating if you bother to do this. And remember most of the time those guys are on edge and ready to crack a skull.

      Just remember you can be right, DEAD right. Just because you think you are right or even are right does not mean the guy holding the club thinks you are...

      http://xkcd.com/538/

    4. Re:Handcuffs at a large protest...not! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      They aren't actually cable ties. They are specially designed for use as handcuffs. Specifically, they are harder to shim and made so that (normally) you need a special "key" to open them or to cut them off.

    5. Re:Handcuffs at a large protest...not! by mellyra · · 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.

    6. Re:Handcuffs at a large protest...not! by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Good luck with breaking out when they are applied properly (i.e hog-tied).

  9. And this is why they use zip-ties now. by Kenja · · Score: 5, Funny

    Handcuffs are just for restraining drunks. For the real dangerous folks (protesters, students, etc) you use zip ties.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Zip ties work in the same fashion as handcuffs, and use a small retainer pin to keep tension. You can still use the shim technique, but with a smaller and sharper shim.

    2. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by Kozz · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    3. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    4. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by MagicM · · Score: 1

      getting your wrists beneath your backside and forcefully squatting down to snap them

      No, thank you.

    5. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      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.

    6. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Or merely friction against concrete...

    7. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      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?

    8. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      And how to you to that when you are hog-tied?

    9. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      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. Having asked many State agencies in the UK via Freedom of Information Act requests, I am unable to get a straight answer from any of them regarding the number of deaths in custody associated with illegal use of restraint.

      Perhaps someone on Slashdot might have better luck?

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    10. Re:And this is why they use zip-ties now. by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      And not beeing able to breath makes it all the more harder for GP to break out of the ties, which was what was discussed and not wheather it was allowed or not.

  10. Re:Why Is This Here?? by DanTheStone · · Score: 1

    There's a Stephen King book with a similar situation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald's_Game

  11. Cute Hack by fm6 · · Score: 2

    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.

    1. Re:Cute Hack by jeti · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Don't you have fuses in the US?

    2. Re:Cute Hack by fm6 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure Walt was careful not to let the wires touch. The resistance of the strap would have prevented a short.

  12. Or you can .... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ...use a key.

    1. Re:Or you can .... by 3seas · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Or you can .... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      ...use a key.

      Or a paper clip. Which of course IS a key once you finish bending it.

    3. Re:Or you can .... by drkim · · Score: 1

      ...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.

  13. Re:Handcuffs... by pla · · Score: 1

    P.S. If any of you OccuTards protest teh GOP convention, I hope you get shot and killed.

    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."

  14. Re:Handcuffs... by ichthus · · Score: 1

    The student debt that they willingly incurred? That, versus the imposed British taxation... yeah, there's a difference.

    --
    sig: sauer
  15. Re:Why Is This Here?? by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is really low, even for you people.

    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.

  16. 1/3 supported revolution ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "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.

    2. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      "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.

    3. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "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.

    4. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      "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.

    5. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "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.

    6. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      "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

      The camping and confrontations with police are turning independents away from Occupy.

    7. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "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.

    8. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      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 Redcoats invaded Boston, if I recall correctly, killing many - it lit the tinderbox. That's where your 1/3 of the population came into play: most people, when faced with a binary choice, will make a choice. A minority who can afford neither option try to stay by the sidelines - or profit from both sides. It's kind of like how today you have Gay Rights, with that 1% supporting them in marriage. Most people are still firmly in the "don't give a damn" category, and there is no incentive to them to change things from the status quo. If, say, "marriage" were disenfranchised, then maybe there would be a concensus of support for Gay Marriage.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    9. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    10. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      I don't think you got the timing correct. I believe a large part of the population was in armed revolt before the decision was made to cut our ties with England and become independent, rather than force a new relationship between crown and colonies (formally recognized autonomy in some aspects of government, representation in Parliament, etc.).

      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 revolution. It was the attempt to confiscate the guns at Lexington and Concord that initiated the shooting between the militia and the British regulars. This is where the "shot heard round the world" took place. If you were thinking of the Battle of Bunker Hill in Boston, that took place a couple of months later.

    11. Re:1/3 supported revolution ... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  17. Re:Handcuffs... by gorzek · · Score: 1

    Well, they got the "Anonymous Coward" part right on that one.

  18. Re:Why Is This Here?? by Desler · · Score: 1

    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.

  19. Hey, Slashdot... Don't Bother Embedding Video! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    EVERY TIME I have tried to watch an embedded video on Slashdot, it has been abysmally slow to load. An almost complete waste of my time.

    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.

    1. Re:Hey, Slashdot... Don't Bother Embedding Video! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      In this case it turns out that the Ooyala player insists on using "local storage" ("flash cookies") before it will work at all, but I do not allow sites to use local storage. Nor should anything on Slashdot be dependent on such a nefarious system in order to work.

      Bad move, Slashdot.

    2. Re:Hey, Slashdot... Don't Bother Embedding Video! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      It isn't that. It's that I have my Flash player set to reject requests for "local storage" (otherwise known as "flash cookies").

      Which is a different issue, but just as bad. Slashdot should know better than to allow such a thing on their site.

  20. What's the escalation in penalties? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 3, 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 for what is now a misdemeanor, as opposed to getting a ticket for the infraction.

    1. Re:What's the escalation in penalties? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, 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).

    2. Re:What's the escalation in penalties? by ImprovOmega · · Score: 1

      I'm not a lawyer, but is it considered "attempting to escape" if you just pop the cuffs and sit there? For me personally I get claustrophobic when confined like that. I wouldn't be terribly bothered being arrested as such, but the cuffs would really irritate me. What if you popped them off and sat politely in the car? Would that still run afoul of this section?

    3. Re:What's the escalation in penalties? by NonFerrousBueller · · Score: 2
      Well, there's "can they charge you with it?" and there's "do you want to pay for a lawyer to defend you from it?" I'm quite sure popping any restraints, no matter what you do afterwards, is going to get you further charges, either escape or resisting arrest. Neither furthers your cause. If you're protesting to make a point, don't give the press or the judge further ammo. A future prospective employer/border control officer may not care so much about a disorderly conduct if the reasons are explained, but the resisting arrest or escape can look a lot worse.

      Look, if you're protesting, you should go into it knowing how far you're willing to go, and if it's arrest, just take the medicine and get on with it. Most cops would much rather be fighting "real" crime than clearing away a bunch of filthy free software types upset about Unity,

    4. Re:What's the escalation in penalties? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 1

      Seems the Northern California chapter of the ACLU 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.

    5. Re:What's the escalation in penalties? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's also worth pointing out that handcuffs are the least unpleasant way the police have of incapacitating you. I can't envision any scenario where your situation improves by doing this. (Disregarding the utility of being able to escape criminals or avoid an embarrassing call to a locksmith.)

    6. Re:What's the escalation in penalties? by drkim · · Score: 1

      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.)

    7. Re:What's the escalation in penalties? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      I should add: again at least theoretically, removing your handcuffs but not trying to escape would not be "resisting arrest". IANAL, but I am pretty sure a good lawyer could argue that on the contrary, it is strong evidence that you were NOT resisting.

      It's not something I would recommend. But still.

    8. Re:What's the escalation in penalties? by yarbo · · Score: 1

      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.

  21. Re:Handcuffs by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    "Rudiments". Sure I know!

    They're the OPPOSITE of "Sentiments"!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  22. Re:Handcuffs... by ichthus · · Score: 1

    I understand this. Student loans are shady -- granted. This does not change that fact that each person taking out the loan consciously and freely made the decision to sign on the dotted line. They knew how much debt they would be incurring, and under what interest rate they'd have to pay.

    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.

    --
    sig: sauer
  23. need to watch this video by FrenchDoors · · Score: 1

    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

  24. Re:Handcuffs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The student debt that they willingly incurred? That, versus the imposed British taxation... yeah, there's a difference.

    Did the debt ridden students go to a private school rather than a public school? Did the debt ridden students live the "college lifestyle" and party all the time or did they get part-time and summer jobs to avoid, or limit, going into debt?

    The average cost of a 4 year public school in the U.S is under $15K per year including room and board. Part-time plus summer work can significantly contribute to those costs. If the student was in a technical field then part-time/summer work may even pay for school and allow someone to graduate debt free.

    If someone is $100-150K in debt from college I want a little more info before they get my sympathy.

  25. Re:Why Is This Here?? by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

    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!

  26. Re:Why Is This Here?? by SomePgmr · · Score: 2

    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.

  27. Re:Why Is This Here?? by pla · · Score: 1

    Except it doesn't teach you anything

    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 just break them by force, you can melt them, and if you actually have something sharp available, game over). Those don't really apply to traditional steel handcuffs.

  28. Re:Handcuffs... by batquux · · Score: 1

    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.

  29. Re:Handcuffs... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, 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.

  30. Video...?` by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
    Ok, did I miss it?

    I looked at all 3x links in the article, and didn't see the video on any of them....

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  31. Re:Going from back to front is probably genetic by rullywowr · · Score: 1

    I'm one of those guys with some "double" joints, including my shoulders. The left one is really loose. I did it with handcuffs one time when I was a teenager, just to prove it could be done. I don't think I would do it now unless I was really desperate. The joint is still loose, but age makes everything harder. I also wonder about possible blood clots or other internal damage from doing it, which I didn't think about when I was a teen because all teens are immortal. :).

    Mel Gibson? Is that you?

  32. Re:Handcuffs... by SQLGuru · · Score: 1

    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.

  33. Re:Why Is This Here?? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

    "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.

  34. Re:Handcuffs... by Tastecicles · · Score: 1, 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 Rights? Not in your lifetime.

    If you rely on science and creativity you also don't want to artificially limit education.
    Education is somewhat significant and long term investment but it will always pay off well for society.
    When a society limits higher education to the wealthy and elite, you'll end up nobility and peasants after a short time.

    Oh, like we have now, you mean...

    Instead you could have a nation of opportunities for everyone, even those born into poor families.
    But you chose to turn education into a business plan, to make profits by running schools or at the very least continue to let it happen.

    Aha! Now you're getting it!

    You, as a society, deserve what you'll get for that decision.

    --
    Operation Guillotine is in effect.
  35. Re:Why Is This Here?? by Raistlin77 · · Score: 2

    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.

  36. Torrent Link by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    Here is a link to a torrent in case you, like me, don't allow sites to used "local storage" via Flash but you still want to see the video.

    1. Re:Torrent Link by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      That is a different video (and a better one). The video attached to the summary, is at tool demonstration desk and not a talk.

  37. Re:Handcuffs... by rk · · Score: 1

    An agreement only one side can change whenever they desire is no agreement at all.

  38. I did not kill my wife by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    I did not kill my wife and then jump into the waterfall.

  39. Good idea. by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  40. Re:Handcuffs... by DarkTempes · · Score: 1

    Wait, how does an M.D. or Ph. D get to default on a loan without penalty.

    This is relevant to my interests.

  41. Re:I'm sure there's a law against that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't know about the USA, but where I live escaping as such is not illegal.

    However, killing/kidnapping/threatening a guard or destroying state property and many other means of escaping are illegal, as is helping somebody to escape.

  42. Rick-roll Alert! by cruff · · Score: 2

    Don't follow the link, or you'll be sorry.

    1. Re:Rick-roll Alert! by sqldr · · Score: 1

      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

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
  43. Re:Handcuffs... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    "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.

  44. Re:Handcuffs... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    "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.

  45. Re:Why Is This Here?? by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
  46. Re:Why Is This Here?? by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

    what do you mean, you people?

    --
    insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
  47. Re:Why Is This Here?? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

    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.

  48. Handcuffs? Not a problem. by PPH · · Score: 1

    Just don't forget your safe word.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  49. If you're handcuffed by the Feds... by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    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 suspect you have hidden weapons (again, don't ask how I know.) If you're cuffed with your hands behind you or if you have such a key hidden both in front and behind you, your odds improve.

    There are little plastic handcuff keys being sold now (although supposedly only to law enforcement) which are very small and not detectible by magnetic search. Buy (or make) a couple and stash them in your money belt or taped to your tool or whatever.

    Keep in mind that if you're being transported by two cops, unless you have a derringer stuffed up your butt, you're likely to get shot once you pick the cuffs and try to flee... When the Marshals transport you, there's usually a chase car following behind the transport van, too.

    If you're being flown somewhere, the Marshals will usually have several Marshals with shotguns standing around when you're being moved from the van to the plane. So unless you're Bruce Payne in the movie "Passenger 57" (and that was a commercial flight, not a Marshals Service flight), or Nick Gage in "Con Air", you're not likely to beat that either.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    1. Re:If you're handcuffed by the Feds... by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      You mean they do work, but not necessarily to escape (which depends on the situation, and whether you know weakest moments). Got it.

  50. Re:Why Is This Here?? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

    There is no such thing as bad knowledge, only bad uses for knowledge.

  51. Re:Handcuffs... by mcgrew · · Score: 2

    FUCK YOU, OCCUTARDS!

    Eat shit and die, Koch, you goddamned evil son of a bitch.

  52. Re:Why Is This Here?? by couchslug · · Score: 2

    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.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  53. This seems unwise by irving47 · · Score: 1

    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?

    --
    I had a sucky sig.
    1. Re:This seems unwise by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Welcome to The Whole Point, brought to you by anarchist OWS types who want to see people die.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    2. Re:This seems unwise by hajus · · Score: 1

      HOPE's been around a lot longer than OWS.

  54. Arrested for protesting by PhamNguyen · · Score: 1

    While I don't deny that sometimes people are arrested who have broken no law, I still object to the summary's implication that protesting=getting arrested. Glamorizing getting arrested and even beaten by the police is a highly irresponsible tactic used by the left. If you exercise your constitutional rights, break now laws, and still get arrested, then I support you for standing up for you rights (although as far as I've seen this isn't that common). If you commit trespass, disobey lawful orders from the police, or illegally block traffic or pedestrians, then even if your protest is otherwise "nonviolent" you are asking to get arrested because you are breaking the law.

  55. Re:Handcuffs... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  56. Now what? by westlake · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Now what? by pla · · Score: 1

      Better to die fighting than bound and prone on the ground.

  57. Wall Street reform is separate from Occupy ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

    Its not that people turned away from the idea of Wall Street and banking reform. Its that people turned away from the Occupy Movement as the vehicle to promote such reforms.

    Our friend anecdotes are not much of a rebuttal against a formal survey conducted by a reputable organization like Gallop.

    1. Re:Wall Street reform is separate from Occupy ... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "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.

  58. Re:Handcuffs... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    "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 best, or dropping out of school.

    Then, when they got out of school, they discovered that the economy was in the toilet and there were no longer any jobs available for new graduates in their profession.

    You do make a good point about credit cards. :o) But the problem is that only a very small minority of students have enough credit (even if it is good) to cover their student loans when they graduate.

  59. Re:Handcuffs... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    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

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers