Why Plainclothes Police Had Striped Reflective Tape on Their Glocks | Hacker News Reader

Why Plainclothes Police Had Striped Reflective Tape on Their Glocks

thedrive.com

67 pointsvinnyglennon72 comments

Saved you a click: It's to prevent friendly fire during a shootout.

That's what I figured-- it's fairly obvious: "why would unrecognizable cops have a symbol on their weapon?" "Gee, maybe so other cops know they're cops?".

Why this is news or on hackernews is beyond me though.

>That's what I figured-- it's fairly obvious: "why would unrecognizable cops have a symbol on their weapon?" "Gee, maybe so other cops know they're cops?".

What's obvious to some is not always obvious to others.

>Why this is news or on hackernews is beyond me though.

TheDrive isn't so much a news website as it is a magazine. This article is more informative than anything, and going back to my previous remark, it educates those who might not've thought about this sort of thing before. As to why it's on HN, same reason; not everybody would assume as much.

Fwiw it wasn't obvious to me until I read the article. I know nothing at all about guns. So I learned something.

Come on, the whole article is mostly rephrasing of the same statement interspersed with tweetquotes. Written to meet word count quota.

>Come on...

... what? I haven't commented on the quality of the article at all.

Perhaps your confusion lies in my saying, "This article is more informative than anything...", but that was just me saying that the article was written as an informative piece, not a piece of news, because TheDrive is a magazine and not necessarily a news outlet.

I guessed this before clicking, but its still interesting to know it exists. My next question is are they like invasion stripes on an aeroplane - i.e. they are changed before an operation so the enemy can't copy them - or are they coded depending on factors like rank or specific training, like the shapes on UK police cars?

The only thing "obvious" is that your hypothesis coincidentally lined up with the actual reason...this time.

It could be to keep track of the official weapon, which would imply they have another one with questionable purpose

I know about digital IFF but I had never given much thought to "old school analog" IFF.

I sort of assumed that uniforms were the primary mechanism, but obviously they can be spoofed, and with "tacticool" fashion as prevalent as it is they can be trivially spoofed. I never gave it enough thought to think up or chase down the actual solution. "They hand out gun stickers" is a delightfully simple and practical answer.

This is the best bit of trivia I've learned all day.

> I sort of assumed that uniforms were the primary mechanism, but obviously they can be spoofed, and with "tacticool" fashion as prevalent as it is they can be trivially spoofed.

This has been a plot point in various movies. See also dressing up as troopers in Star Wars.

There's a 'what to do if you're an evil genius' guide floating around, and one of the recommendations is to make sure that helmets had clear masks so people's faces could be seen—at least in the Evil HQ.

I read a rendition of that Evil Genius How To and never understood that point until now: as someone evil, I want my minions to be faceless and threatening, and above all I don't want their targets to see the fear behind the mask and get hope that they could defeat my minions.

Looking at it from an opsec point of view and it makes total sense, however, so long as your minions can all recognise each other. Failing that, its the information age so just use facial recognition - not as biometric locks, but to identify unique individuals and alert security of unrecognised people or people with face coverings. Uniforms and battledress could even incorporate body-worn cameras in order to identify individuals both to the minion wearing the device, and also as a remote "eye on the ground" to the security team.

Biometrics should always only be used as usernames and not passwords, both in fiction/sci-fi and real life.

I don't know about digital IFF. I had to look it up, stands for "Identification friend or foe". Does "digital" mean it's just for military applications of identifying ships and aircraft, or is that something you broadcast from a computer in a security/pen-testing context?

In the 1980s, the NYPD used elastic headbands. There was a color or pattern for the day, and plainclothes cops were issued the proper headband at the station.

I wonder what they're using now, headbands being so over.

They use armbands now: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nypd-arm-bands/

Wikipedia link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_of_the_day_(police)

This is like the invasion stripes of aircraft I mentioned in another comment. Interesting to know that it is an actual thing.

Not really. If you can spoof a uniform you can spoof a sticker.

And given it’s not a reliable negative identifier, it’s probably not a huge help anyway.

You can't spoof a sticker you don't know about, because they handed it out that day. It's a shared secret.

Cool, fta just said some had stickers and some didn’t. Now you’re just adding confusion into the mix.

Yea thanks, and now any and all potential misdeeders will attach it to their Glocks ...

Obviously they will change the tape now that this version has been burned.

If it's anything like military colour codes, they'd be swapped regularly as a matter of course.

I have no idea how often they swap, but generally speaking, Federal agents unholster their weapons in public very rarely. So, there is probably not as much need for frequent rotation compared to the military.

They may have a "colour of the day" and routinely swap them. Hard to know how they're affixed, though - they don't look very swappable.

Could be something as simple as hook and loop tape. One side is permanently/semi-permanently affixed to the slide the other side gets swapped based on x criteria. That's how I'd do it. The military loves velcro.

True, but the photos don't seem to show the depth that hook-and-loop would add. That, and even the milimetre that hook-and-loop would add could impede draw and reholstering.

I was in a non-US military and we used electrical tape - two or three strips around rifle magazines.

It would be crazy if they didn't have a color of the day, but then again, humans are not always rational, and it looks like it's not the type of tape that comes off easily--though it's impossible to tell just from a photo.

I've had strangely a lot of experience with stickers and sticky tape, and the material the sticker is made of can aid removal even if the glue is sturdy: paper stickers tear, but thicker plastic stickers will hold together as you force them away from the glue. Alternatively, the glue could be water soluble, or perhaps soften with heat.

Yeah, that's my take too. If it's removable/swappable, it'd have to be something that never impedes drawing or reholstering, which makes me suspect it's more permanent than hook-and-loop, at least.

How many variations are possible? If they're supposed to be recognized at a glance, from across the room, during a firefight, how elaborate can the code be?

s/It's/It might be/

While the article implies it has the answer (including with the title).. it's clear they're speculating and don't have the answer. A quote from someone who is qualified to speculate: "is not a totally uncommon practice"

Wait. How does one have time to see a small piece of tape on a gun before making a decision to shoot someone with a gun pointed at you?

It is so you can flash the side of your gun at someone else in a dark/smoky/obscured room and they can see the signal, but you don't need to completely surrender situational initiative. The tape is reflective to help in this case. The person flashing the sign knows it is not 100% certain to work, but it better than metallic crickets or pass phrases.

Is it better to not even have a chance to work? Not sure why the choice has to be between a 100% effective solution and a "better than nothing" solution.

It's like saying to the Fire Extinguisher salesman, "But what if the fire is too big and I run out of propellant? No thanks I'm not going to own one."

That isn't the point of the exercise.

Suppose you're an officer responding to a shootout between two randoms. The tape signals whether either of them are police.

(This is why I would never carry a gun in this country. Suppose you do stop some sort of crime in public at gunpoint-- any trigger-happy idiot who walks in is going to see you as the aggressor.)

There are a lot more common scenarios than the "split second don't shoot reaction" scene from every movie ever. From the videos I've seen a lot of officers were co-mingling with the "protesters", it would be nice to ID someone easily who *isn't* pointing a gun at you but who also has a gun.

Habit. They're trained to take in the scene in order to e.g. evaluate if they have a safe shot. Even if it only works some of the time, every time it works is a gain.

They don’t. But if you see someone else with a gun before they see you, it might give some idea as to who they are.

Variants of that technique have been around for a long time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_of_the_day_(police)

It's less effective nowadays, during the BLM protests last year the daily codes were quickly identified and announced on social media

See also the IR flag patches that were used by ISAF forces in Afghanistan.

Do you have a source for that colour code leak? I don't disbelieve you, I'd just like to be able to read (and reference) the source.

> It is used to differentiate "non-combatants from combatants in a crowded situation,"

Is it typical to refer to friendly forces in a conflict as 'non-combatants'? I would describe any armed participant as a combatant, reflective tape or no.

Yes, a non-combatant is typically a medic or chaplain in a military role; as an example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28596180/

> Under the laws of armed conflict military medics are deemed non-combatants, and as such are subject to certain protections and limitations

A medic could be an armed (holstered but within visible eyesight) non-combatant.

Carrying a gun in a war zone is plenty of evidence (way less than the US would usually require) to treat you as a combatant and I could have no sympathy for an armed medic who got shot.

US forces are not welcome in the majority of the world, I wouldn't fault a medic wearing a US uniform for wanting to be armed. But I'm with you that keeping it in plain sight is not a great idea.

"ok everyone, the drive noticed, time to rotate tape colors!"

This seems highly counterfeitable, not to mention a hostile person in plainclothes could pick up a gun marked as friendly from a dead security agent.

This tactic would best be against a force that doesn’t know about it, or an organized force.

It's a part of defense in depth. It's not the sole marker of good vs. bad, but it's a way to minimize friendly fire incidents.

Notably, the US Secret Service uses a method of "color of the day" lapel pins and spends millions acquiring them from a specialized manufacturer. The newer models have RFID tags and IR embedded.

Could someone dress up in a suit and pretend to be an agent? Sure. Could he grab one from a dead agent? Possibly. But now you're making the objective harder for an attacker and tilting the odds in your favor.

Yeah, but defense in depth requires that each layer make the security strictly better, or, at least, not introduce a huge vulnerability.

If a non-cop picks up a tagged gun, that seems like it makes them more easily confused as as a good guy, and thus a lot more dangerous. And if you were already able to reliably distinguish plainclothes-cop from plainclothes, then what does the tagged gun add?

What am I missing here?

How does RFID and/or IR help in the middle of a shootout?

If the shootout is in a low-light situation, then IR-reflective items light up like xmas lights in NODs.

The Secret Service pins are not for shootouts specifically but for access control of secure areas. I worked an event where the President spoke so I got one of the pins once I cleared into the secure area. I’ve still got it in a mementos box somewhere.

Edit to clarify: a matching pin was not sufficient on its own to gain access to the secure area. But being in the secure area without a matching pin would certainly be sufficient to draw some official attention.

I've got one of those Secret Service pins as well, from an event with the VP. I'd be surprised if it has RFID, although I'm not about to tear it apart to find out.

If you have a somewhat modern Android device (2012 flagship and onwards) you might be able to read the tag, as long as its not Mifare classic.

RFID is more for tracking an asset, in this case a human, in a building I suspect. You know someone passed a sensor at a certain point, someone in a command center can go "that person isn't supposed to be there, challenge them now".

IR says "this guy I have in my scope from my perch on this nice rooftop does not appear to be a friendly", as well as via fixed camera or drone.

The IR Signature Control Low Emissivity Tape used by militaries says "oh they're reflecting IR in the correct pattern" by someone using NODs, cameras and scopes that aren't filtering IR, etc so when you see a bunch of people running up on you at night (or even during the day) and for whatever reason they aren't shouting or radioing the equivalent of "it's me, don't shoot!" you don't mow them down with a hail of bullets only to find out you just slaughtered a bunch of friendlies.

It doesn't hurt. There is no budget constraint to preclude it. It can help when overhead surveillance is providing intelligence via radio to agents on the ground or when night-vision gear is in use.

Any epsilon of benefit is probably deemed worthwhile.

RFID is probably used for crowd control / helping agents determine who's allowed access to assets.

It's not always the same. They change it constantly and it's probably not the only small thing that they look for.

If they swap it daily/weekly/randomly/per event a counterfeiter would have to have every known variation on hand at the drop of a hat in order to reliably counterfeit it.

Yeah. Red/white looks like the pool of possible patterns might be relatively small, and you can carry 50+ rolls of retro reflective tape in a backpack. If you knew every variation it would be easy to carry them to an event, and then apply the correct one there.

It's a cognitive aid, probably linked to drills and training.

If an enemy has the same sticker it would slow reaction time and cause confusion, but not prevent coming to the correct decision.

So, sounds like it's better than not having the tape?

Makes sense BUT why not tape on both sides? I think none of them did.

Still that's the most plausible answer. Only other thing I could think of was that they might help when reviewing video evidence later.

The guy in the middle of the most famous picture seems to have tape on both sides. I think the other guys don't have tape at all, possibly because they're from a different branch.

Yeah, Mr Lefthanded appears to be sweeping his LEO friends with his barrel also.

Basically, Sashimono.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sashimono

So, all you need is a tape to blend in?

This is one of several levels of security that law enforcement uses. These markings would also be changed quite often—having the wrong colour would make you stand out immediately.

Yep, tape of specific color/pattern used the day you plan your attack.

It’s far more likely to be a “unit designator” than “friend or foe”.

For one thing, they’re unlikely to be regularly changing out the tape on their pistols. It’s also very possible that in an actual conflict weapons could be picked up by the other side.

This is more for “Oh, that guy is dressed like a fed and his gun has red and white striped tape on it. He’s DSS (Diplomatic Security Service). I’m Capitol Police, so he’s probably not going to hear me if I call for his attention over our internal channel. Better transmit on the shared channel instead.”

Reply on news.ycombinator.com