LOILOI44 Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 Being a retired member of the law enforcement community, I would recomend either Tomiki Aikido, traditional JuiJitsu,or AikiJitsu. I don't know enough about hapkido, but I hear it would also be effective. I would steer away from BJJ. Let me explain. In BJJ the idea is to go to the ground with your opponent. I never wanted to go to the ground with a suspect if I could help it. You do not want to roll around with a person while you have a gun. This is a perscription for trouble. I always found it was best to take your opponent down and still be able to be standing. Judo would work too. It is good to know what you are doing on the ground, but it is not the best position. Something else to think about with striking styles...repeated blows to a person's face will make them bleed. It's not the healthiest thing to come in contact with a person's blood, and it could open you up to many law suits.
JerryLove Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 I'm unclear. You are trying to put handcuffs on a suspect. You've got him to the ground. You are standing. How do you complete te arrest witout at-least kneeling? My undersandting of the "95% of fights go to the ground" quote is that it was specifically from a police report, and was a direct result of officers being trained to take the fight to the ground. https://www.clearsilat.com
Kirves Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 My undersandting of the "95% of fights go to the ground" quote is that it was specifically from a police report, and was a direct result of officers being trained to take the fight to the ground. Yes, but it usually did not involve the officer wrestling on the ground, no guard or mount positions as such. From standing locks/throws directly to positions where the opponent is on his stomach, hands behind his back ready to be cuffed by the officer who is holding his hands. See this clip: http://www.finjutsu.com/videot/1.mov It takes a while to load, so you may want to right-click the link and choose "Save As" instead of clicking the link to directly open it.
LOILOI44 Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 Sorry maybe it was my fault for not explaining myself fully. For me I always felt it was best to take a suspect down and not have to go down with them. To do a tackle takedown with a firearm puts you at a serious disadvantge. I felt it would be best to take the suspect down using a throw or sweep and then apply a joint lock and then cuff. At worst if the suspect was down and you were still standing, it allows you put distance between you and them. This would allow you to use non lethal or lethal force if nescessary.
LOILOI44 Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 Kirves, good link. That is efficient and doesn't put the officer in danger. It's a shame that the self defense programs of some police departments are so lacking.
Tombstone Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 good style for police officers? smith & wesson
Kirves Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 smith & wesson Certainly makes it easy to cuff them!
JerryLove Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 So you don't feel that BJJ trains good skills for keeping yourself upright and grappling? Or you simply believe its skills at such are inferior to the other arts you mentioned? Actually, based on your requirements, I'm gonna change my recommendation to some silats. I had originally excluded it for it's focus on the "fast kill" (I hear police can get in trouble for biteing), but the focus on upright grappling and taking down an opponent while remaining standing against single or multiple opponents would seem to fit your requirements well. https://www.clearsilat.com
JerryLove Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 I watched the clip I have some issues, though they may be resolveable. You start with one hand on the elbow-chokepoint, but when the swing starts, you do nothing to control the attackers position. The attacker in this instance kinda "sticks a hand out" rather than actually throwing something. I also cannot say I ever agree with "backing up", which is exatly what you do when the attacker starts. your chose counter could have been nullified simply by the attacker being aggressive (moving toward you while attacking). Lacking a committed attacker in teh demo, I don't see what you would or would not have done; and so cannot comment on that. you then reliy on a standing wrist/arm lock. In competition, these have been shown very far from reliable against trained opponents. Once he is down, the pin is not bad. I'm assuming you have a handcuff already on at the beginning and the hold at the end is based on the cuffs being on both hands (otherwise I have sissue there). Mostly I would disagree with your choice to "back up" when confronted with a punch, your lack of any attemt to smother, and a bad "uke". https://www.clearsilat.com
Kirves Posted January 29, 2003 Posted January 29, 2003 Of course it is just a small piece of a seminar, so you cannot judge the whole technique or concepts from the small clip. Some of the points are about how to initially hold the person in the first place, you are not just holding his hand you know... Backing up is good if a) you have room b) you have a decent lock on him and c) your technique is designed to make him lose his balance. Also, many times when a police officer is making an arrest, he is not facing a martial arts black belt. The clip was obviously not a demo on how to restraint a black belt budoka. That would be quite a task for the police officer even if he himself is a black belt - it's like two black belts fighting each other! This assumes that the opponent has co-operated this far and you are just being cautious, you are talking to him and he decides to "go for it". You are already using caution and take control immediately. In the demo case, the opponent was supposedly not a martial arts expert. BTW: the demonstrator is the head instructor and founder of Hokutoryu Ju-jutsu, which is the most popular martial art among police officers here in Finland and the neighbouring Baltic countries. Here the law prohibits too severe techniques anyway, he bleeds and to court you go.
Recommended Posts