Good Style For Police Officers

[TJS]

I think We are going to have to agree to disagree here.

[JerryLove]

Another thing that was not considered is the fact that in a uniform, you can weigh up to 30 lbs heavier. You're wearing a vest, and a belt with a gun, sometimes 2, you have a flash light, baton, extra ammo, portable radio, and other junk. JuiJitsu is ideal because the samuari wore armor. It's all about economy of movement, minimum effort; maximum results.

This is actually a good selling point for KM. KM is definately intended to work under these conditions (being designed for soldier use). If you were comparing Jujitsu to (say) Capoeria, you would be offering an excellent reason to exclude Capoeria.

 

Of course if that's just offerd as a "Jujitsu is well suited" affirmation, I agree.

[LOILOI44]

I can respect that. I'm just going from personal experience. Krav Maga had not had any popularity when I was on the street. Out of sheer luck a JuiJitsu/Judo school was the closest to my house. I guess it all boils down to personal preference.

[LOILOI44]

quote="JerryLove"]

Another thing that was not considered is the fact that in a uniform, you can weigh up to 30 lbs heavier. You're wearing a vest, and a belt with a gun, sometimes 2, you have a flash light, baton, extra ammo, portable radio, and other junk. JuiJitsu is ideal because the samuari wore armor. It's all about economy of movement, minimum effort; maximum results.

This is actually a good selling point for KM. KM is definately intended to work under these conditions (being designed for soldier use). If you were comparing Jujitsu to (say) Capoeria, you would be offering an excellent reason to exclude Capoeria.

 

Of course if that's just offerd as a "Jujitsu is well suited" affirmation, I agree.

 

Yes but how often do people train in full equipment for hand to hand combat? When I learned "self-defense" I use the term very loosely, we were wearing a t-shirt, shorts, and sneakers. Do you know of any military units that train h2h in full gear? This I am curious about

[JerryLove]

Not really, no. But I was not dicussing training but intent.

 

Much of my opposition to the recommendation of KM for this work, over other arts, is based on the intent of the training (to inflict damage). Krav (unless it's poorly designed, and I do not believe that) will be choosing techniques and stratigies that work well when in gear (as it is expected that they will be in gear if they fight). This would seem to be a "positive reason" from suggestin KM would be a good plice art.

[TJS]

Jerry Love, I made an Inquire To John Whitman(senior instructor in LA) About your concerns with KM and LE, since he is proabably much better suited to answer the question I will just post what his response was-

 

I would respond that it's a valid question (it is!) but add the following:

 

The writer's points assume that there is an absolute distinction between "high violence" and "police work." This is a not exactly true. Police officers are not required to reject high violence...they ARE required to recognize when it is necessary, use it, and then deescalate (this, by the way, is one of the reason their job is so, so difficult).

 

This is also where KM's LE training differs from civilian or military -- of the three areas, LE has the greatest obligation to deescalate appropriately, and our training incorporates this.

 

But the AGGRESSIVE side of our training is still intact...because it is taught IN CONTEXT. Our LE guys don't punch everyone -- they punch to the face when they have to make a gun disarm, or are attacked with a knife or stick. In fact, in many of the LE situations in which we show our aggressive tactics, LEOs can often use deadly force, let alone a punch to the face.

 

Our aggressive tactics are shown in contexts where the officer or a third party is attacked and can use high levels of force but cannot access them. These contexts include: assault with weapons, self defense as it pertains to weapon retention, hostage rescue, arrest and control when the subject is violently resisting, etc.

 

In addition, the comments assume that KM does not have arrest and control procedures or soft techniques. It does...it is just not the main focus of military or civilian training. Why? Because most military units are tasked with killing, not capturing per se, and most civilians just need to negate the threat and make distance. Only LE (and some private security and specialized military units that operate in an LE-like capacity) are tasked with neutralizing, controlling, and arresting. Therefore, only they get the emphasis on this portion of the system.

 

One of the first units in Israel to reserve KM training was the military police. KM in the U.S. has been taught to LE since the mid-1980s. Darren himself was the person Imi worked with the integrate KM with U.S. use of force policy. He is considered a use of force expert and is often asked to lecture on the topic to departments.

 

Imi often said that it was the job of the practitioner to be good enough that he DIDN'T have to hurt the other person too badly. That didn't mean he wanted the system softened -- it meant being able to go from passive to aggressive immediately when necessary, and then deescalate appropriately. I don't think most of us live up to this requirement -- but LE get paid to do it (although they don't get paid nearly enough).

 

Case in point: in Texas, an LEO trained in KM was searching a house with an elderly female who, it turned out, was 5150. He rounded a corner and she put a gun to his head. He made our defense, but in mid motion saw that she was old and feeble, abandoned the punch and went to the disarm, which was succesful. This was an example of KM's combination of aggressiveness training and awareness.

 

Two final points: in my opinion it is a mistake to make an absolute conclusion that more aggressive systems lead to improper use of force. Indeed, the opposite argument can be made (LEOs reading this can back me up on this): officers given less aggressive tactics find that those softer tactics don't work -- then they panic and move immediately to higher force options that get them into trouble. KM delivers a system that solves the problem immediately, often freeing the officer from accessing higher force options that might be called into question later. This isn't an absolute, either -- just a statement that questions the negative assumption about aggressive techniques.

 

Or, you could sum up everything I've just written with this statement: "Agencies that adopt Krav Maga generally find their use of force complaints go down. For more information, contact Londale Theus, Director of Force Training, at londale@kravmaga.com."

[TJS]

I hope this helps, IF you had any more concersn/questions/dissagrements etc, YOu would proabably be better off talking to him dirrectly on the KM forum or by E-mail...simply becuase like i said he would be the most knowladgeable to speak too(unlike me).

[LOILOI44]

TJS, thanks for the info. It showed good faith to do that much research. Personally though, I chose an art I felt comfortable with. John Whitman, I'm sure is an excellent martial arts instructor;but he wouldn't be the one in front of a grand jury. It's all about what I can articulate. I think it's good for an officer to know there are options out there, and then make their own decision.

[TJS]

I agree it ultimatly comes down to the person.

[monkeygirl]

I agree it ultimatly comes down to the person.

Expanding off of that, you've got to remember that police come in all shapes and sizes. Also, don't forget that there are female police officers as well. Because of this huge diversity, officers would need to choose which style is best for them.

 

All of that aside, however, my suggestion for a style would be CDT. I believe it is already popular among police officers, because it is effective, yet leaves no lasting marks on the criminal, which rules out the possibility of the officer being charged with police brutality. Still, we have spoken many times on KF about attackers who are drug-crazed and feel no pain. This is where your more powerful, lasting effects come in to play. Police officers would need to know how to effectively break the knee of someone who is on a doped-up rampage. This means going directly for the break, without relying on disabling the person first through painful strikes. The criminal isn't going to feel any pain, but s/he won't be able to walk if their knee is busted.

 

Anyway, I'm probably just repeating what others have said.