Police and striking arts

[Tombstone]

This seems a little odd to me. Alot of cops take martial arts simply because of their job. Why are they learning striking arts? As far as I know, a cop can't legally beat the crap out of someone their trying to arrest. Wouldn't it make more sense to focus on takedowns and holds rather than strikes?

 

My point is: Why learn techniques that you can't use instead of the ones you can?

 

(On a side note, some stations have karate classes for the police. Isn't that a striking art?)

[shotochem]

If a police officer is disarmed or taken by surprise they are certainly justified in striking quickly and effectivly. If they are unable to draw their weapon, they are just as vulnerable as you or I. MA in conjunction with law enforcement training are a valuble asset to a police officer and the public which they help protect.

 

Hats off to those who do this difficult, dangerous and often thankless job.

 

 

(Patrick, we need one that takes his hat off!!!!)

[JerryLove]

Truem but trying to retain a weapon, trying to get out of a grab to get a weapon, and trying to remove a weapon from an opponent are all grappling techniques.

 

I concur that the focus of a police officer should be on weapon retention, then apprehension; and that both of those are primarily acts of grappling.

[cross]

Yeah, i think it would be time better spent if they focused on restraint techniques and weapon skills. But in saying that they don't just learn how to strike in these classes they learn how to block and parry also. The most common attack from someone resisting arrest is going to be a strike. so at least they can defend themselves against it.

[tommarker]

I have no problem with police laying out hits when the job calls for it. And "when the job calls for it" is not an arbitrary choice. Police are governed by use of force rules and regulations that hold them to a considerably higher standard than if you or I had to defend ourselves.

 

http://www.cpoa.org/Publications/Sample%20Policies/use_of_force.shtml

 

Think about it, if a criminal gets the slip on an officer and kamikaze's them out of nowhere with a sucker punch, the officer has to respond quickly to regain control of the situation. It's not always going to be possible to pull out the OC, Baton, or gun.

 

Why waste time with an Aikido move that -- likely -- won't work when you a quick palm strike to the chin, axe hand to the collarbone and stomp will put the ASSAILANT (not the poor innocent criminal) on the ground quickly?

 

I'm very much against police abusing their powers, but I'm even more in favor of them going home to their families every night.

[JerryLove]

Think about it, if a criminal gets the slip on an officer and kamikaze's them out of nowhere with a sucker punch, the officer has to respond quickly to regain control of the situation. It's not always going to be possible to pull out the OC, Baton, or gun.

 

Option 1: The policeman has been grabbed and needs to grapple.

 

Option 2: The policeman is not grabbed and needs to subdue (grapple).

Why waste time with an Aikido move that -- likely -- won't work when you a quick palm strike to the chin, axe hand to the collarbone and stomp will put the ASSAILANT (not the poor innocent criminal) on the ground quickly?

 

Because these functionally never result in a subdual. Take a look at more than a minute of more than a dozen police with sticks hitting Rodney King over and over and over... notice that for over a minute he continued to get back up. Wonder what one officer with no stick could have done from a striking perspective to keep him down.

 

Then relize the use of force issue you just mentioned, and remember that grappling arts (which, I might add, have a proven record of success over striking arts; and which are obviouly more useful in wrestling for control) inflict less injury when trying to subde. Levering someone into place to cuff hem is preferrable to breaking their collar bone then inflicting enough brain-stem trauma to incapacitate them so you cancuff them.

I'm very much against police abusing their powers, but I'm even more in favor of them going home to their families every night.

 

IIRC this is the "complex question fallacy"; like "anyone who loves Jesus will agree that tacos taste bad". We all want them going home at night; we don't all agree with what best accomplishes that goal.

[ninjanurse]

JerryLove,

 

Do you have law enforcement experience?

 

[JerryLove]

You'd have to define "experience"

 

I used to study at a school run by two depudys during a day-class where I was the only non-police officer there. I used to work with the Cape Coral City Police dept (I was MIS), I've trained law enforcement, security, and prison personell at the school I attend. I've had this conversation with many people in law enforcement. I also have some close friends and relatives in law enforcement agencies (CCPD, Monroe County Sheriff, etc) and in millitary police services.

 

Does that qualify as "experienced" with law enforcement?

[delta1]

Scenario 1: (already brought up, but to expand on the concept) The officer is suddenly attacked at close range. Joint locks, grappling and submissions are fine, but the first concern, and the natural reaction, is to block and strike. The officer has to survive the initial assault in order to employ other techniques. He also has to be able to * the situation before deciding to subdue the assailant. He may need to leave and call for backup. Solution- striking techniques to stun or disable and get time to * and take the proper action.

 

Another point here, even grapplers learn to strike. If you can't fight, you probably won't be able to use joint locks and grappling.

 

 

 

Scenario 2: a simple contact goes wrong, the officer finds himself suddenly facing multiple, aggressive subjects, and one attacks. He has no time to deploy a weapon, and the last thing he wants to do is get tied up with only one bad guy. Solution- footwork and striking.

 

Scenario 3: The officer is facing a grappler who intends to clean the floor with him. Never play the other guy's game, especially when rolling around would give him access to the weapons carried on your belt. Solution: footwork, move to give yourself distance and time to deploy those weapons. If he gets too close before you get a weapon deployed, strike and move again.

 

Scenario 4: Dog attack. Joint locks are simply not an option. Striking, while not optimal either, is far preferable and may disuade the animal. Of course, when he's on the officer, there will be some form of grappling used- probably with the intent to get the dog off so he can kick the crap out of it to buy time to get his sidearm and shoot it.

 

If I was a cop, I'd learn a good striking art that also incorporates stand up grappling and joint locks, and I'd suppliment it with grappling. I'd also take one of those high stress reality courses, and get expert supplimental instruction in firearms. But the truth is that most of the police out there don't learn any more than what is taught to them at the academy or required by their department.

[ninjanurse]

Experience meaning street time as a police officer, not a civilian (as there is a difference between having knowlege of something and having actually experienced and used something). Semantics may also play a different role here as one my have different definitions of techniques depending on the art they study, etc. Speaking from a reference of experience (street time) I can say that striking arts do have an appropriate use in officer safety.