politics
The ICE shock glove is not the story. Who's wearing it is
I taught arrest techniques and non-deadly force for a good part of my career, and I spent more than 24 years in immigration enforcement, finishing as deputy field office director for Enforcement and Removal Operations in New York City. I now serve as a visiting fellow for deportation studies at the Oversight Project. Before all of that and alongside it, I spent over three decades in uniform, including running a theater internment facility at Camp Cropper in Baghdad. I have put hands on people who did not want hands put on them, and I have taught other people how to do it without anybody ending up in an ambulance.
TL;DR
- The 'shock glove' is presented as a technological advancement to improve officer and subject safety during arrests.
- Historical context shows a consistent trend in developing less-lethal force options, each initially met with criticism.
- The glove's function is compared to existing 'drive-stun' capabilities of Tasers, offering a potentially safer application.
- The author criticizes the outrage over the glove as politically motivated, noting its prior use in other institutions without similar public outcry.
- ICE has established protocols for documenting, reviewing, and certifying the use of force, which will apply to the gloves.
- Removing the glove would not eliminate the need for force, potentially leading to more dangerous physical confrontations.