4 ms·

> Touching face, chest, groin, etc is forbidden. Sure, just like beating a suspect is.

• skeledrew 2mo ago
  Yep and the point is moot in that sense. There are those who will use the gloves as prescribed, same they wouldn't stoop to beating up a person of interest, etc. And there are those who will go directly for the sensitive areas out of spite, whether it be with glove, baton, gun butt or fist.
  • Aachen 2mo ago
    This whole subthread (where I never meant safe as "unable to cause any sort of harm to any organism under any circumstance") feels moot. In general though, there's a reason virtually all countries heavily restrict access to weapons. A law enforcement officer who doesn't carry weapons (lethal or otherwise) will have a harder time killing someone by accident, so the person above you brings up a valid concern. The question whether the concern should lead to the gloves being banned is about proportionality, and I'm not sure we can get to a useful conclusion of that pros-and-cons discussion in an HN comment under the size limit