The torch thread.

[Cassius]

Overseas, 80% or more of my work is at night, so I rarely am without a headlamp. Though I actually wear it around my neck. Much more convenient, and less prone to blinding people.

The current one I have:

http://www.petzl.com/us/outdoor/head...ies/tikka-plus

I've had other models, but this is the one that has lasted the longest without being stolen or misplaced. Probably due to the fact that it's not particularly tacticool.

[gregaquaman]

Well...if you can't carry a knife or a gun, how about a stick with nails in it, a hatchet, or a tomahawk? Those would likely suffice if you can't put a sword in your hands.

You have to think sideways with self defence in Aus. The rule of thumb is that if you carry something with the intention of hurting somebody with it it is an illegal wepon. You can carry knives etc but you need to have a reason to do so.
Torches are good because they can sit in cars(in case of breakdowns) or pulled out if you hear a noise in the dark. Security guards for example never carry maglights because you can hit somone with them. They are carried because they are durable, will fit on a belt and produce a lot of light.

[Rock Ape]

Security guards for example never carry maglights because you can hit somone with them. They are carried because they are durable, will fit on a belt and produce a lot of light.

You're not making sense.

First you say maglites never carried, but then say they are carried because they are durable ?

A torch isn't a weapon PERIOD.. it's a torch, that's what it was made and intended for. What the person does with it makes it a weapon (or not) don't confuse the two issues.

[money]

You're not making sense.

First you say maglites never carried, but then say they are carried because they are durable ?

A torch isn't a weapon PERIOD.. it's a torch, that's what it was made and intended for. What the person does with it makes it a weapon (or not) don't confuse the two issues.

It's plausible deniability. He's saying he can't carry the maglite with the primary intention of using it as a weapon, just like he couldn't be carrying around a baseball bat on patrol. However, if he happened to hit somebody with it to defend himself then that's okay.

As for myself, I keep a Surefire 6p in my messenger bag. I also have a Streamlight TLR-1 that I put on my 9mm or my AR15 as needed.

[Wounded Ronin]

Carry 2 flashlights if you remotely think you might have to use one as a club.

[wetware]

Anyone have any experience with those strobing high lumen lights? I would imagine that they are extremely effective hippie mace but have no evidence.

[gregaquaman]

Carry 2 flashlights if you remotely think you might have to use one as a club.

I am +1 on that. I was going to mention it when the idea of the asp baton/taclight idea was floated.

I am just not a fan for a whole heap of reasons.

one of which is you cannot see the guy you are trying to hit when you take your torchlight off him and have a chance of blinding yourself.

I go through a couple of buildings that tend to scare the **** out of me and will usually go through with big torch and little torch.

I am not alowed to carry a bat though.

[Rock Ape]

It's plausible deniability. He's saying he can't carry the maglite with the primary intention of using it as a weapon

Yeah I understand but my statement still stands.

A torch isn't a weapon by any definition therefore if you're carrying a torch justifiably - because it's dark or, because you may work within a low level light environment, later using the torch as a means of self defence because it was in your hands or, about your persons isn't an issue.

Regardless of intent, (unless you are stupid enough to advertise the fact) carrying a torch with the intent of possibly having to use it as a means other than illumination would be a very difficult thing to prove in a court of law.

Say I was carrying a men's fitness magazine from the mess hall and got jumped on my way back to work, am I not allowed to defend myself using reasonable force to do so ? Therefore using the rolled up magazine (because that's how I'm carrying it) and smashing it in the face of the perp as part of my "reasonable force" defence is quite justifiable.

When I'm asked why I was carrying said magazine, I have a perfectly acceptable defence.

Carrying a large, well built and somewhat reliable torch on duty at night etc is likewise just as a "reasonable" defence. There doesn't need to be any deniability.

Why were you carrying that torch ?

Because I work in the dark and needed to see what I was doing

Why did you crack the skull of the person who assaulted you using the torch ?

Because it was in my hand at the time and I had no other course of action available to me as I feared for my life. I only hit the perp enough to stop the attack.



Dave

[3moose1]

Move out of Australia.


Get a "tactical" pen.

Just carry a bigger goddamned flashlight. I've got a stinger, with a $30 dollar LED bulb upgrade and rechargable batteries. Thing is as solid as my cock, and bright as ****. Why do I carry such a big ass flashlight? Because it is bright, reliable and comes with a warranty.

...and its heavy and solid enough I can beat the **** out of people with it.

But seriously, killer, its not like you light up someone with the beam, the you take it off them to hit them, and all of a sudden they're wearing harry potter's fucking invisibility cloak. You'll be goddamn fine.

[3moose1]

Also, move out of australia. Seriously. It has been scientifically proven to house 500% of the world's most deadly animals, and you can't even carry **** to defend yourself.