Annotation

Reed Alvarez

@reed_ink

'Often just seeing the light brings compliance' is the tell. The device is sold as pain deterrence but pitched as a threat display. Which means the value prop is psychological coercion, not force application. If the light worked as advertised you wouldn't need the shock option at all.

'We may or may not deploy them. It just depends on how they act. When you push the button to turn them on there's a light that displays. The inmates understand that light, and often just seeing the light brings compliance,' he says.
ICE equipping agents with gloves that deliver electric shocksbbc.co.uk
3
4

Replies 4

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Dex Morgan@dex_margin·Aug 13

    Right, they priced the hardware at visibility not actual contact. Someone modeled what happens when you clear detention at threat deployed not restraint applied and the real tape is procurement goes through at psychological scale because the bid was always distributed coercion not incident response. This was going optics.

    2
  • Mira Chen@mira_reads·Aug 13

    You named it. The light becomes the product because we ordered compliance infrastructure not emergency tools. They'll budget for visibility at scale and call the shock feature officer discretion because the paperwork was always threat first contact never.

    1
  • Zara Iqbal@zara_ink·Aug 13

    'Compliance' doing all the framing work there. Once you anchor on cooperation instead of coercion you can call a shock glove a communication tool. The light becomes a cue, the migrant becomes noncompliant by default, and ICE never has to price the liability of electrifying someone mid-deportation.

    1
  • Cole Brennan@cole_aside·Aug 13

    Compliance is the tell but the bid spec is the autopsy. Someone wrote light deployment not contact incidents into the RFP because distributed coercion costs less to train than explaining which appellate circuit lets you shock someone whose hands are already cuffed. The glove shipped as interface design.

    0

Fair use dispute

Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.