Police and Martial Arts

[txinvestigator1]

I am curious if your department encourages, discourages or is silent on officers learning martial arts.

Is your departments policy in writing or spoken.

Please no posts on good or bad martial arts, or what you THINK should be, etc. As Joe Friday always said, "just the facts".

[Samuel]

Let me just say that department attitudes towards Officer Safety and Defensive Tactics are both apathetic AND pathetic from the decision makers AND line personnel...

:rolleyes:

[resqr1]

I practice once in a while to keep my skill up, but I wouldn't even begin to think of telling anybody on my department. Hell, I was made fun of for carrying a back up weapon. Not very progressive.

[911]

Our policy, in wriiting, prohibits us from using any force technique vs a suspect unless it is specifically authorized by the dept. (PPCT). I know of at leat 3 other PD's with the same policy.

[Samuel]

That sucks. I feel for you. :(

[indycop]

My department has no written policy on martial arts. I know several of us study various styles. I also know that the academy allows us to hold training at the academy, and encourages recruits to get involved. I am one of several redmen at my department, and after the redman scenarios, all of us give a brief intro, and mention training we do. We also encourage all recruits to get involved in one or more of the training groups.
As far as use of force, as long as we stay within our departmental parameters, we are good to go. By this, I mean, we don't break necks when only soft empty hand techniques would be allowable. I have used my training many times, and it was not within the curiculum taught by PPCT. Never had an issue, as long as force levels were close.

[Scubapro]

BY policy, we are to use department approved techniques regarding Use of Force.

[navyfiveo]

We are taught a certain amount while in the academy. As far as off duty martial arts, many many many people here participate in training after hours. However; there is always a however. We are only allowed to use the force necessary to stop a subject or apprehend a subject. I honestly can't answer the question on what would happen if someone used techniques other than what is taught at our academy. We don't get much of that type of action around here.

[Samuel]

Navy (and others), throw out the word "necessary" when talking about Force. Use "reasonable" (as in "objectively reasonable") instead...

I hope you guys with the restrictive Use Of Force policies are able to make some changes. It is pretty ridiculous to limit what officers can or can't do (with respect to exact technique) in a "tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving situation". (Now, I'm not talking about shooting someone for calling you a name).

Were you "taught" to claw, scratch, bite, gouge, OR to shoot your weapon while holding it upside down and pulling the trigger with your pinky, ETC? Bottom line is that you and your partners get home at the end of shift.

Quite often, there are better techniques out there than those that are shown/taught in department "training". It is ridiculous (but all too often that is how the policy makers are) to believe that the limited training that officers get through most departments is sufficient enough or comprehensive enough to handle every situation.

To those with military backgrounds who are stuck in a department with narrow minded and short sighted UOF policies, your department is basically saying that all your military experience and training is no good and can't be used?

Even though our Use of Force policy uses it, I dislike the phrase "departmentally approved" (ours states "departmentally approved control hold or come-along"). Well, I'm sorry, but I think the "department" has only shown me MAYBE one or two control holds or come-alongs. That phrase also needs to be taken out...

[Irishcop377]

In are department there is no writen rule of what defensive tactic we use or practice. Unfortunatelly our academy is alittle out dated and still uses akido. (that is not to say that it doesn't work as I still practice it) I teach a street survival coarse at the academy and have added a graple coarse to the defensive tactics class. Almost all the inservice officers who attend the class admit that the graple coarse is one of the best things they have learned since coming out of the academy. But I believe that ANY self defense coarse that is takin' by an officer can only help. And no PD can tell you what to do on your own time...

[911]

Maybe not in Ireland Irishcop, but in the litigious USA, they can pretty much do what they like. Remember, many US cops do not belong to unions and work at the whim of the sheriff or chief. I would like to see Aikido defended in court as a defensive tactic. It would be simple for a competent attorney to undermine the training and prove it was not applicable to law enforcement. That is why systems such as PPCT have arisen. They are tactically, medically and legally researched. No martial art is.

[TNT]

Greetings All,

Excellent discussion.

There is a point that is missed here. Regardless of the technique used or which martial art (if any) it came from, the actions of the officer will be judged under the 'objective /reasonable' guidelines. A good defense attorney would be able to negate any nonsense brought up. This is where recognized LE UOF experts come into play.
There exists no case law that makes LE use 'approved' techniques or allows LE to be sued for using non-approved techniques. The officer may get jammed up by his own dept. for using something that saved their a$$, and the agrieved 'victim' may get some cash for the officer violating agency policy, but they will not be very successful in claiming excessive force unless the force is deemed to indeed be excessive in retrospect using the objective/reasonable guidline.
Training is constantly changing and improving to assist officers in dealing with tense, uncertain, and/or rapidly evolving confrontations. Many agencies fall prey to training groups that will not support the agency in court if an other than 'approved' technique is used by a LEO.
All techniques, whether street fighting, martial art based, or pick-up-the-available-2x4-and-swing-it-moves, can have a valid place in law enforcement. Agencies open themselves up for liablity if they restrict options and an officer gets injured or killed and they could have easily used a technique to neutralize a threat. (ie: 'failure to train' lawsuits)
I teach control tactics / combatives to many agencies and officers, including for my own dept. I am state certified, and so are all my courses. I also teach martial arts off duty. There are some things that are done in my MA class that would be ridiculous for LEOs to do, but many options exist in the martial arts world that greatly benefit the officer and can result in a lower use of force due to increased officer skill. I encourage all my LE students to seek out any kind of hand to hand training they can...because at the end of the shift, I want them to go home. That is the bottom line for me.
Anyone can be sued for any reason in the U.S. It is our articulation of our actions that will greatly assist in our defense should the need arise. Kick a$$ if needed, then write a fantastic report.

Una Stamus,
Mark.