Page 4 of 6 First 123456 Last
  1. #31
    WhiteShark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Atlanta GA
    Posts
    9,167
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by ranger joe View Post
    Most agencies that I know of now do not allow "blood chokes". I cant tell you how many times I have been wrestling on the ground with a guy and saw a RNC or guillitine(SP?) and not been allowed to use it. Simple, Effective, and I cant use it unless its "deadly force". Sad really.
    Does that mean that "wind" chokes ARE allowed? If so it is patently insane. Blood chokes are way faster and in my mind that makes them safer for both people.

  2. #32
    dwkfym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tampa Bay Area
    Posts
    2,020
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    There must be some lame-ass case where blood chokes are deadly force now. If I go to the ground in a defense situation I will go for more painful, more permanent joint locks instead.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Nowhere In Particular
    Posts
    227
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by dwkfym View Post
    There must be some lame-ass case where blood chokes are deadly force now. If I go to the ground in a defense situation I will go for more painful, more permanent joint locks instead.

    See State of Maryland vs. Kevin Killian

    The prosecution referred to the rear naked choke as the 'LAPD Sleeper Hold'.

    Seriously.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    94
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by WhiteShark View Post
    Does that mean that "wind" chokes ARE allowed? If so it is patently insane. Blood chokes are way faster and in my mind that makes them safer for both people.

    Well, you caught an error of mine. Actually blood and wind chokes are considered one in the same for "use of force" situations. Both are not allowed except under extreme circumstances. My error for leaving that out.

  5. #35
    Styygens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland
    Posts
    2,178
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I know the thread has moved on to LEO defensive tactics, but I thought it might be worth mentioning that Matt Larsen is on the cover of the September 2010 Black Belt Magazine.

    Video here: http://www.blackbeltmag.com/basic-tr...n/archives/905

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    478
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Styygens View Post
    I know the thread has moved on to LEO defensive tactics, but I thought it might be worth mentioning that Matt Larsen is on the cover of the September 2010 Black Belt Magazine.

    Video here: http://www.blackbeltmag.com/basic-tr...n/archives/905
    That was certainly more worthwhile watching than most of the stuff that turns up in that magazine.

  7. #37
    Styygens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland
    Posts
    2,178
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    It gets better... The magazine also has a brief profile of MCMAP "founder" Cardo Urso, the senior NCO there at the beginning. It turns out he retired and now runs an MMA school! I did not know that.

  8. #38
    DdlR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,802
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by ranger joe View Post
    Well, you caught an error of mine. Actually blood and wind chokes are considered one in the same for "use of force" situations. Both are not allowed except under extreme circumstances. My error for leaving that out.
    The major liability issue with blood chokes is that, given limited training time, no referees and the confusion of a real-life street drama, it can be hella hard for an officer in the field to distinguish between "subject violently resisting arrest" and "subject desperately trying not to die". This is compounded in team takedown situations - again, the same problem is faced by prison guards and psych. workers. It only takes a bit too much pressure for a bit too long and suddenly a simple restraint turns deadly (positional asphyxia FTW, except that everyone loses).

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    94
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by DdlR View Post
    The major liability issue with blood chokes is that, given limited training time, no referees and the confusion of a real-life street drama, it can be hella hard for an officer in the field to distinguish between "subject violently resisting arrest" and "subject desperately trying not to die". This is compounded in team takedown situations - again, the same problem is faced by prison guards and psych. workers. It only takes a bit too much pressure for a bit too long and suddenly a simple restraint turns deadly (positional asphyxia FTW, except that everyone loses).

    Positional asphyxia and blood chokes are two different animals and I don't think that they should not be compared. Being in a fight, potentially for your life and knowing that there is at least "1" gun in whatever fight your in brings a different aspect to "street fighting". Almost always having to be "reactive" means a lot of times your starting behind the power curve. Your rolling around, getting scraped up, wearing all kinds of gear (which can lead to injuries) maybe being outnumbered, maybe be in traffic, or a confined space. Bottem line, get the fight over with fast. Often times a RNC is in my humble opinion is a way to go. If I start punching someone, what if I break my hand? Of course im going to use my strong hand, which is my gun hand, so now I have a broken hand and the fight turns deadly...and again im behind the power curve. Obviously we can't haphazordly apply RNC's to everyone ("Hey sir...that a fine looking donut ya got there...RNC!!!!!!") It takes training, and there is a time to use it (just like all weapons, gun, pepper, taser, words) but I think we should be allowed to use it on a lower level of force. Anyway, just my thoughts on it. By the way I heard Matt larson is a BB in BJJ as well as the creator of the MACP.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    774
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by dwkfym View Post
    There must be some lame-ass case where blood chokes are deadly force now. If I go to the ground in a defense situation I will go for more painful, more permanent joint locks instead.
    I know that you are referring to a SD situation, but to take this into a psychiatric context: Joint locks aren't such a good option when dealing with psychiatric patients per se. E.g.: people having a psychosis; they can be so 'mental' that they don't even notice breaking something.

    Can't the derail about mental health care be given it's own thread? I really like the original thread as it was.

Page 4 of 6 First 123456 Last

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO