Any companies protecting chain-links from "breaking"?

It has been known for a long time of how you can bind up the chain on handcuffs and then in a sweeping motion, snap the cheek plate or the a chain's eyelet to free the hands.

Companies can improve the locking mechanisms all they like, make them use non-standard keys. But at the end of the day if the chain can be broken in 20 seconds what is the point? Is there something that companies have been doing different to thwart this?

Three chain link are not affected.

It has been known for a long time of how you can bind up the chain on handcuffs and then in a sweeping motion, snap the cheek plate or the a chain's eyelet to free the hands.

Companies can improve the locking mechanisms all they like, make them use non-standard keys. But at the end of the day if the chain can be broken in 20 seconds what is the point? Is there something that companies have been doing different to thwart this?

Most are 2 links though. Even expensive models like the S&W 104. Cuffs supposed to be for high risk people. What good are they if someone can work the chain for at worst 5 minutes, quietly, covertly, then one quick motion and their hands are free?!

It has been known for a long time of how you can bind up the chain on handcuffs and then in a sweeping motion, snap the cheek plate or the a chain's eyelet to free the hands.

Companies can improve the locking mechanisms all they like, make them use non-standard keys. But at the end of the day if the chain can be broken in 20 seconds what is the point? Is there something that companies have been doing different to thwart this?

old stories and boring detail. In america it doesn't matter, if they break the chain they are lilley to be shot dead for trying to escape. so it doesn't matter. Also excellent cuff have been design but due to the cost, they are not used, why? because price is far more important they police officers lives. GOTCHA.

It has been known for a long time of how you can bind up the chain on handcuffs and then in a sweeping motion, snap the cheek plate or the a chain's eyelet to free the hands.

Companies can improve the locking mechanisms all they like, make them use non-standard keys. But at the end of the day if the chain can be broken in 20 seconds what is the point? Is there something that companies have been doing different to thwart this?

Standard chain link handcuffs are not designed for high-risk prisonier. For special cases there are blue-box or hinged handcuffs. Pick proof handcuffs are expensive. Hiatt HSS9, Clejuso 101 or Saf-Lok MK V all are above $100

It has been known for a long time of how you can bind up the chain on handcuffs and then in a sweeping motion, snap the cheek plate or the a chain's eyelet to free the hands.

Companies can improve the locking mechanisms all they like, make them use non-standard keys. But at the end of the day if the chain can be broken in 20 seconds what is the point? Is there something that companies have been doing different to thwart this?

Anonimus, Smith & Wesson M104 is rated as maximum security and specifically rated for high risk prison transport. Used all over the place including on death row.

It has been known for a long time of how you can bind up the chain on handcuffs and then in a sweeping motion, snap the cheek plate or the a chain's eyelet to free the hands.

Companies can improve the locking mechanisms all they like, make them use non-standard keys. But at the end of the day if the chain can be broken in 20 seconds what is the point? Is there something that companies have been doing different to thwart this?

For a such prisoner belly chain with Martin link is mandatory. Martin link prevents chain links from dead-locking.

It has been known for a long time of how you can bind up the chain on handcuffs and then in a sweeping motion, snap the cheek plate or the a chain's eyelet to free the hands.

Companies can improve the locking mechanisms all they like, make them use non-standard keys. But at the end of the day if the chain can be broken in 20 seconds what is the point? Is there something that companies have been doing different to thwart this?

Good info. Thanks. I never considered that.