Talks to Watch

UK Cops Disarm Man Wielding a Machete | Firsthand | CBC

1.1M views · Aug 2, 2016 · 1:49 · 0 HN recommenders · 7 mentions · discussed 2019–2023

A two-minute CBC Firsthand clip showing UK police surrounding and capturing a distraught man holding a machete, then taking him to a hospital. It is an excerpt from the documentary Hold Your Fire.

Why Hacker News points people here: Cited in policing debates as an example of de-escalation and subduing an armed suspect without guns.

“Here's how the UK engage someone wielding a machete, without guns or any other weapons beside extendable batons.”HN comment, 2020

What Hacker News said 7

Cites italistairSHDec 2019

“this is the police in the UK apprehending a suspect with a machete.”

UK police apprehend machete suspect without guns

Full comment

I was going to bring that up. Totally agree - further normalizing the use of violence by the police should be avoided. While not a sniper, this is the police in the UK apprehending a suspect with a machete. I've never heard of similar tactics being used in the US. And conversations with police have led me to believe they would actively avoid such tactics and instead resort to violence. this video

in “ACLU to police using robots: Tell us more” · view on HN
Cites itchrisseatonJun 2020

“Here's how the UK engage someone wielding a machete, without guns or any other weapons beside extendable batons.”

UK police disarm machete suspect using shields and numbers

Full comment

> If you were a police officer, would you, unarmed, engage another person wielding a hatchet? I'd say that's unlikely. Would you even take the job if you were unarmed? Great example! Here's how the UK engage someone wielding a machete, without guns or any other weapons beside extendable batons. this video They try to deescalate, they bring in reinforcements, they surround, then they disarm him using shields, not weapons, and he survives to stand a fair trial. No guns needed. And if they thought they couldn't arrest him using shields they could call in a specialist firearms unit, who are specifically trained, authorised, and accountable.

Cites itcygxJan 2021

“it can be done (eg made the news a while ago)”

Example that armed suspects can be arrested without shooting

Full comment

Circumstances matter, but it can be done (eg this video made the news a while ago). Here in Germany, people wielding knives get killed from time to time as well. Pepper spray tends to get used first, and I do not remember any case where a dozen rounds were fired[1] (German police fire on the order of 50 rounds total per year, cf link ). [1] edit: apparently, this does happen, cf link

in “Infosec implications of the US Capitol physical breach” · view on HN
Cites itBoorishBearsMay 2021

“Like the stuff in those videos is not easy”

Example of non-lethal police response to a knife attacker

Full comment

This is missing the forest for the trees so badly it hurts. Why do you think I said I'd be forced to shoot? Because even without training common sense tells you "not allowing the attacker to close enough distance with you to use the knife" is a pretty good course of action By your logic the moment a person calls 911, the people who are supposed to help, the person has been sentenced to death. Think about that for a second. 1. The cops will arrive 2. "avoid knife getting close to me" 3. Less than lethal is not reliable, hell even lethal force isn't instant, I feared for my life, they're shot very dead. - It's not an easy problem, but how is that ok? There's not many ways to fix it other than trying something other than lethal force. this video link link Like the stuff in those videos is not easy, I'm not trying to pretend I could do it, or most people could. It requires cops being able to put the most efficient response for self-preservation behind trying to save someone, which again, I'm not saying we require of anyone... But let's call a spade a spade at that point. That's not the concept of policing I see paraded. That's not the "thin blue line", it sounds more like a cell of civilians that are deployed to bad situations where they then "apply self-defense"...

in “Leaked emails show crime app Citizen is testing on-demand security force” · view on HN
Cites itmrsuprawsmDec 2021

“It takes a bit of effort and coordination but is obviously massively preferable”

UK police tactics for subduing an armed man

Full comment

There’s a fair number of videos from eg the UK where they do exactly this. The usual playbook seems to be: get a few people distracting the guy from the front, and another few rush them from the back whilst distracted and hit them with batons or just jump on them. Or just distract them for a long while and wait for more backup and people with shields. this video It takes a bit of effort and coordination but is obviously massively preferable to being executed on the spot by the state.

in “Man dies after he is shot by the police with a stun gun and catches fire” · view on HN
Cites itthrow0101aJul 2022

“How the UK police dealt with a machete-wielding individual”

UK police handling of a machete-wielding individual

Full comment

In most other countries, training encourages the use of lethal force as a last resort. In Germany (pop. 84M), in 2015, a total of 101 rounds were discharged by police for the entire year: * link How the UK police dealt with a machete-wielding individual: * this video

in “Former PM Abe Shinzo dies after being shot” · view on HN
Cites itceejayozMar 2023

“mobbing with massively superior numbers, resulting in no harm to anyone”

Police mobbing a suspect with superior numbers, no harm done

Full comment

> if you want to enforce the law for dangerous and violent people, doesn’t it seem reasonable you’ll need at least equally if not more dangerous and violent people to do so? No. There are other ways. For example, mobbing with massively superior numbers, resulting in no harm to anyone, and a suspect getting the hospital care they needed: this video

in “Gang Members Hold Positions at ‘Highest Levels’ of LA Sheriff’s Department” · view on HN