There's actual video footage of HK police officers arresting a kid because he had a flashlight in his backpack. They deemed it as a "weapon". Right now, HKPD is going on a rampage and making up excuses to arrest anyone who is brazen enough to talk back at them. It's juvenile. Good luck to the police officers who think that they'll magically go back to their normal lives after this. After grossly mistreating so many ppl in the community they swore to protect, they should expect spit in their food.

Some flashlights can definitely be used as weapons. A Maglite to the clavical while holding the bulb end is a pretty sure fire way to break ones collar bone and otherwise incapacitate an assailant. One of the reasons I keep one in my car. I once had the use it as a deterrent in a road rage incident. Random guy got pissed at me for driving aggressively in a school (I was driving the speed limit and he tried to pull out in front of me from a parallel parking spot, I had to swerve to avoid him and he followed me until I got stopped by a red light.).

Anyways, this guy gets out of his car and starts aproaching my car, and I get out of my car with the flashlight. Guy was easily 80-100 lbs larger than me. He immediately stepped back and accused me of being offensive. I responded with: you honked at me, gave me the finger, got out of your car at a light to confront me. I'm being defensive. You also have a significant size advantage. You have a problem with how I drive? Follow me to the police department and I'll tell them what I witnessed. Come a step closer, and you're going to the hospital, most likely.

Guy got back in his car and didnt follow up on my offer to speak with the police.

Used properly, a Maglite can be a great personal defense weapon. Swing toward the clavical (the area where neck meats shoulders). Again, hold by the bulb end; the shape will naturally help hold itself in your hand and youve got 3 C cell batteries at the other end which give a bit of heft to a swing.

A flashlight in your backpack is not a weapon.

Also an inexperienced person trying to use a blunt force weapon is more likely to become the victim.

In the eyes of the law, the intent matters much more than whether you can actually use the “weapon” effectively, especially if it can be demonstrated that somebody with enough skill/experience (not necessarily the person being found in possession) can use the “weapon” effectively.

Also, in the case of something like AntiFa, even if you had something like a Maglite in a backpack, intent to use could easily be construed. Broad daylight, youve got a Maglite? To what end?

Because days end?

A flashlight depending on type and size can be deemed as weapon. If it is a small pocket size naturally that would not immediately categorised as a weapon. However, if the flashlight sized object is a lazer pointer then it possibly can be categorised as being a weapon not physical but a distanced weapon of harm. It depends on the output of the Lazer if it is within safety parameters and also the users intended use. If the user is a lecturer or consultant then it fails within reasonable use. I think the legal considerations law enforcement and legal professionals have to deal with is more complex.

Part of the reason Maglite is so popular with security guards is that it's a weapon that also doubles as a flashlight and thus becomes legal to carry around.

I would not use the word rampage. Taking a neutral stance on the current matter in Hong Kong, you can see the use of extreme force catapulting bricks and rocks at the law enforcement officer and is more clear cut. The Lazer Pointer incident highlights the grey area with actual weapons to cause harm and the intention of modification of objects as weapons to cause harm. Lazer pointers with the wattage 1-5w can damage your eyes with a 10sec exposure. However, it does not take a lot of skill to upgrade the Lazer emitter with soldering electronics to increase output higher to cause harm easier and longer distances. The Police didn’t make that aspect clear. In addition reasonable use would have a person purchase one but purchasing 10 seems to fall out of ordinary use.

Mens rea alone isn't enough to be convicted of a crime, but the actus reus in this case sounds like possession rather than use.

I don't know about HK laws on laser pointers but here in Australia there are restrictions on laser pointers - anything >1mW requires a permit in most states, without a permit you're liable for possession of a prohibited weapon whether or not you planned to use it. Even <1mW, you may be required to have a reasonable excuse for possessing it if you take it into a public space (at least in some states, I haven't checked all of them).

Agreed and I think the public perception on the news regarding the Lazer Pointer incident doesn’t encompass the use of Lazer pointers or the governance of Lazer pointers. However, I think the Police didn’t make clear enough is the suspicion of carrying weapons and the wattage of the Lazer pointers weren’t disclosed at this point. Furthermore, the intention to modify something as a weapon to cause harm is something most regular people don’t consider. It’s easy to upgrade a laser pointer to emit light dangerously high and able to cause damage at a longer distances. I think Hk should take a page from Australia and limit the use of lasers as they are harmful even at 1-5w output. I certainly wouldn’t let my kids play with them.

> I don't know about HK laws on laser pointers

I think at this point you should be looking into China's laws on laser pointers, not Hong Kong's.

It's not at that point yet. PRC does have a garrison inside HK but they're sitting still. It's possible they could go in plain clothed to collect info and provocateur to discredit the protesters. It'd cause a pretty big meltdown if they were busted doing that.

Aside from that: HK has control over its statutes. https://www.elegislation.gov.hk/index/en/subject

Basic law (the part PRC plays a role) is the constitution. For an overview: https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/facts/index.html

Aside, Here's a better article: http://www.thestandard.com.hk/section-news.php?id=210397

No. The central government maintains a tight grip on the Hong Kong Government, and of course occasionally acts of its own accord in Hong Kong (see the case of the booksellers' rendition), but for the most part they still have to let the Hong Kong legal system operate as it does.

Even in light of these protests, it continues to seem fairly unlikely that Beijing will want to intervene militarily or impose direct controls over the HK government unless things heat up considerably more than they have already.

The justice system and judges are still under UK/HK control - HK has no law/rule that only HK people could be served as judge. https://www.judiciary.hk/en/about_us/judges.html

Your tone implies that there are rules.