7/06/2010 6:49am, #11
First (emphasis mine):
Now, if they didn't make it out of the academy they are larpers. If they are beat cops that are inflating their credentials that's different.
I agree they are full of **** for lying but, I can't put them in the same boat as a civilian with zero training or skills.
If you saw these kind of claims being made, would they make you decide there and then not to bother with the guy?
I imagine that IIF's point was something more along the lines of, "if the art is real, perhaps some smaller lies can be overlooked." In this case, I'd have to agree, strangely, because my thoughts were that the smaller lies are never even suspected, they are accepted as truth, which is the goal of the liar in telling the lie (and the reason MABS exists?) Coupled with a healthy dose of "but I really want to learn X, and lying liar Y is the only teacher of it," I can see myself possibly even training with the sack of ****.
Of course, I suck at putting words into people's mouths, so I'm now standing by to be duly corrected by IIF.
7/06/2010 9:22am, #12
Originally Posted by Larus marinus View Post
Has anyone actually been exposed by the site as falsely claiming to be/have been a police officer? Not that I've seen - you'd need rocks in your head to do something that idiotic because the cops tend to treat that **** seriously...
Unsure, but a recurring theme seems to be the elite cop / elite soldier thing; the severity of the lie doesn't detract from the fact that it's a lie. So, being a regular beat cop while claiming to be super vice undercover superman is no different than being a police larper, imho.
I do suspect that some of these guys, while they were indeed LEOs, sometimes choose to recount their careers as though they were the main characters in a TV show/cop movie
Like I said, larpers. The difference between being a cop and pretending to uber-cop and being a civilian and pretending to cop is exactly nil, imho.
Lying is lying I didn't say overlook a small lie.
We are talking to different defintions..
Laper doesn't equal a liar to me in all cases. You said a cop inflating his creds is the same as a civilian inflating his creds and I disagree.
I disagree in the larp department ONLY by my definition. He has training the civilian does not. The cop isn't a larper by definition. They are at different levels. In other words both are being frauds, both are liars, neither should be overlooked.
One is a larper and a liar the other is just a liar.
7/06/2010 2:12pm, #13
If you're pretending to be a cop as a form of entertainment and in which all involved parties are in on the gag, it's larping.
OTOH, If you're claiming elevated status that you didn't actually attain as a rouse to increase your client base, it's a lie.
In the context of this discussion, larping is irrelevant. OP was wondering about inflated claims on "about Sensei," pages.
7/06/2010 3:18pm, #14
However, when combined with other 'red flags', such as high Dan ranks in multiple unrelated arts, Soke, Hanshi, Supreme Grandmaster and similar titles, membership of dodgy Halls of Fame and Sokeship Councils, 10th Dan at a young age, Koga Ninjutsu, Traditional Judo, 'Tactical' TMAs, self-created arts with mangled Asian names, vague, nonspecific claims of championships and gold medals, implications of BlackOps work, skill-by-proximity-at-seminar-and-book-signing photos, etc. - yaknow, thngs that make you go 'meh'... well, it makes me decide that, on the balance of probability, that this guy probably isn't worth bothering with.
I guess that what I was really asking was whether grandiose-sounding police claims should generally be viewed in a similar manner to the above by default?
7/08/2010 4:21am, #15
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- State of Jefferson
As a former Army M.P. I can tell that awareness outweighs almost any kind of mystical, secret Law Enforcement martial art. We were taught very few offensive moves the most of them being restraint and control.
There are levels of force you have to go through and it's drilled into you from pretty early on in training.
When I worked PS on a nuke site it was a bit different. There it was shoot 3 times center mass and say "Halt" after wards. Or was it "Halt" 3 times then shoot......
7/08/2010 10:40am, #16
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
I pretty much agree with the comments here. If said instructor has his bio as simply "I was a police officer for X amount of years" then sure that's great. But if he/she goes into a whole spiel about how many conflicts they were in, how many brawls and altercations they won etc then I would say approach all their claims with caution.
This sorta reminds me of that whole Captain Chris/Lt. X douche bag. On his website he had some back story about numerous altercations where he learned first hand what does and does not work on the street. Too bad he then talked about training professional mercenaries and assassins.....
7/08/2010 8:50pm, #17
All things are relative when talking with cops. I have a lot of family members who are in all kinds of different law enforcement communities. Between all of them, I have the best fighting abilities. My training did not get better in DT class or academy. It was done in a civilian school. I have logged more use of forces than any of my relatives. I have also done under cover work. I talk the least about it, than any of my relatives. The guy in my family who has the biggest mouth and acts like the biggest bad ass, has the least amount of use of forces and worst skills.
This has been my experience in LEO circles. The quite ones, don't need to talk about it because they have been there and done it. The ones talking are usually the ones who haven't been there.
If a guy claims he taught LEOs, that is not a very big distinction. One of my prior DT instructors couldn't fight his way out of a bag. One of the guys I was on the RRT with got on the team because of politics, he was a ***** and I saw him run from a fight one time. When I did under cover stuff, I was scared shitless. So take it with a grain of salt. The best way to tell someones ability is on the mat. No way around it.
7/08/2010 9:19pm, #18
Is there some list of accepted 'go-to guys' who The Powers That Be have somehow determined to have the real - or is it often a case of the Captain (or whoever) phoning up local MA schools and asking if someone could come down one afternoon and show the troops some HTH stuff?
7/09/2010 3:47pm, #19
Normally, you don't have outside people coming in to teach DT. The DT classes have a state approved corriculum. The only thing taught in there is what has been approved to use in a use of force. Now, occasionally you have someone come in out side of work that will teach some stuff. The way they normally determine who is going to teach those classes is someone who is known by an officer and has something to teach that other people will want to learn.
We had a guy come by to teach one time and he was a TSD guy. His stuff was garbage and it was a nice joke for a long time. We tried to get the guy to spar with us. When he wouldn't do it, we started taking a lot of breaks until he was told to leave.
Yeah, he probably puts on his bio that he taught the Team.
7/09/2010 4:41pm, #20
The SPEAR system is pretty popular lately. We have a few officers certified. But PD's run into issues when it comes to DT training. Injuries and the workmans comp issues that arise, overtime issues to get officers into training while maintaining staffing on the road, officers who don't want to "roll" complaining to the Union when they are forced to who then suddenly come up with injuries (we call it "visiting Dr. Summeroff").
When I was in the FBINA I spoke to a dept. training officer who said he loved the SPEAR stuff, but they had to discontinue it because so many officers were getting injured in training.