Questions for LEO's with MA experience
Do you find you're less likely to reach for a weapon because you've had empty hand fight training?
You do know that LEOs have hand to hand combat drills as part of their job training, right?
And that there are protocols that need to be followed before a weapon is drawn?
EDIT: Point being, this is a silly question.
Last edited by Steve; 3/27/2009 6:02pm at .
No it isn't, I think LEO's who fit the description may not think so either.
I never said it didn't warrant discussion, just that relying on MAs is a fools game when you could be dealing with armed criminals.
Yes it's a little silly. Yet, stupid MAists do precisely that--there's a bad "kung fu for LEOs" book (it's at B&N, and really sucks, don't know the name) where the idiot author tells a story about disarming crazies with knives instead of following procedure (hey, there's that word again). His partner had to shoot the other guy.
The answer is, MA shouldn't interfere with progression of force protocols. It should fit into them.
PS. I can't see rep without going to someone's profile...porque!?
Steve and 1point2 are absolutely correct. We had a few guys that were slow to adjust, but all came around eventually. The Force Continueum (spelling?) dictates how you act/react to a threat situation. A deadly force situation calls for deadly force, not MA technique. We had our mandatory PPCT crap, then we had our more realistic defensive tactics where we did our stand up techniques and practiced our groundfighting. One thing I would say was that the MA trained deputies normally reacted faster and more smoothly.
Originally Posted by Cougar Spirit
That's what I have noticed as well. The guy who train are more likely to get into the fight a lot quicker and with more appropriate responses.
I don't trun to weapons if I don't have to because I don't like the ramifications. I don't like haveing pepper spray all over me. I also don't want to have to go through all the extra paper work. I don't want to shoot somone if I don't have too. A lot easier to restrain and let them cool off. Fighting is a lot funner too.
I've had guy that I fought with, come up to me later and thank me. That makes you feel a lot better than having to go to funerals or court.
what I mean to ask is "have you've relied on a H2H techniques when in fact you should probably have used a weapon?".
In that context I say the question is very subjective and hard to answer except in obvious situations.
Originally Posted by ojgsxr6
I originally took the your question to mean did one use H2H to control a passive resister instead of deploying OC spray for instance and in that example I would say absolutely.
Use of force changes constantly with the situation, so it's extremely difficult to interpret if you are not there (why the courts try to, I don't know.) LEO's who have been trained in unarmed combat do have an edge, especially when ground fighting with a suspect. You can't draw any of your weapons, but knowing a little combat BJJ or other grappling techniques will save your life.
It's important to note that restraining a guy without deploying a weapon (taser, baton, OC, etc.) does help to decrease the amount of paperwork, medical attention, etc. But most LEOs understand that they have a duty to use extreme force when necessary to protect life.