Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Forum at

Why should YOU join our forums?

  • Connect with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Read up on the latest product reviews
  • Make new friends to go shooting with!
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

Glock Talk is the #1 site to discuss the world’s most popular pistol, chat about firearms, accessories and more.


Discussion in 'The Martial Arts Forum' started by twoblackbelts, May 15, 2009.

  1. twoblackbelts

    twoblackbelts NASA reject

    May 1, 2009
    Up on The Mountain
    Question mark would not fit.

    I've always thought it should. My eldest brotherr has 3 blackbelts, and he's never shot anyone or hurt them during an arrest because of his schooling. (He's a deputy).

    I vote yes.
  2. Ralff


    Sep 10, 2008
    Central FL
    They don't already? I thought the academy would teach them some basics ...

    I could definitely see the advantages that Judo or BJJ would offer though. If not manditory, I think the department should pay for lessons if they wanted to learn.

  3. twoblackbelts

    twoblackbelts NASA reject

    May 1, 2009
    Up on The Mountain
    I don't think they use Tasers in Aikido dojos, no.

    I taught a lot of cops in FL, but no other State's LEOs have ever showed any interest.
  4. dugo


    Jul 29, 2008
    Training involved quite a few police and military personnel over a pretty good period of time; aikido, karate, some grappling arts, etc. Worst comment I ever heard from one was that what they were doing was not always directly applicable to police scuffles. (The guy who said that was practicing an effective branch of shotokan, and I took it to mean it did not have enough grappling or control techniques to be useful in many control situations. He was dedicated to it, though.)

    Best I heard was an aikido practitioner who had originally asked whether karate would be better, because it was easier for him (big muscular guy, used to hitting). He continued in aikido, though, and a couple of years later, he took a gun away from someone in the act of pulling it, controlled the subject without hurting him (much), and prevented shots being fired on himself and several other police. Probably would otherwise have been very bad situation for police and BG's both.

    In telling me about it later, he said the best part was that he was calm and pretty relaxed through the whole thing... no under-reaction, no over-reaction. Kept other people cool, too, from what I hear.

    Disclaimer: much aikido, in the US at least, has been accurately described as "some idealistic dance". Some, however, is very effective after sufficient practice, and still maintains ideals and technical subtlety. Sometimes gotta look hard to tell the difference. With that caveat, I'd vote yes.
    Last edited: May 27, 2009
  5. deadday


    Aug 14, 2007
    If by martial arts you mean something like Krav Maga or something similar to the Army/USMC combatives program, then yes.
  6. TBO

    TBO Why so serious? CLM

    I guess his bro never faced a firearm or edged weapon.
  7. Angry Fist

    Angry Fist Dehumanizer® Lifetime Member

    Dec 30, 2009
    Hellbilly Hill
    Gun Foo, bishes. And cAPS LOCK. ****in' deadly.
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2014
  8. Like many other skills, MA requires practice to be even minimally proficient. It's questionable whether or not most LEO will spend the necessary time to excel at even one technique, to say nothing of a full tool box.
  9. Deputydave

    Deputydave Millennium Member

    Feb 20, 1999
    Here is the long and short of it; most martial arts, as taught in a modern setting are based on sport methodology. It is not beneficial to learn for the types of altercations a LEO or Corrections Officer is going to get into. In fact, it sport methodology training is detrimental.

    Self-defense training methodology

    Secondly, more often than not, academy training is a Defensive Tactics skill set that is fairly watered down. I say this as an Academy instructor. It is designed for the least capable rather than pushing the recruit for excellence in this area. Too be blunt and totally politically incorrect, some folks, regardless of best intentions, are not suited physically (or mentally or emotionally) to be a LEO or Corrections Officer.

    Thirdly, it all boils down to $. We need to keep LEO on the road and CO's on duty in the jail and prison. When their at training they aren't 'on the job'. So rather than more training, they get by with what they can get by. Personally, rather than qualifying with say 120 rounds once a year, as an example, it would be far better to qualify with 10 rounds once a month. Rather than getting maybe 4 hours of D.T. once a year, it would be better to get 1 hour once a month.

    To be fair though, some systems don't require a lot of training or refresher training. Systems such as SPEAR or Boatman Edged Weapon Defense statistically don't require a lot of training and more importantly, because they're based on gross motor flinch response, are retained in long term memory.

    Now as a caveat, I would like to see far more martial arts trained as far as throws and locks. That is what an Officer (Deputy, Trooper etc) needs in addition to punches. Unfortunately, LEO's and CO's are people in the sense that some are lazy, some are out of shape, some aren't motivated etc. Only a small number train with a firearm and/or H2H on their own time. And I applaud those that do.

    Not only do I train in martial arts, I teach so I can speak on this with a level of authority.

    But bottom line is this and I'm VERY vocal on this point; far better for them to train in the limited D.T. they get in the academy on a regular basis than to get into a sport martial art. TKD and MMA and BJJ and the like are great martial arts when confined to the competitive venue. They can get you killed on the street unless you're really lucky.

    I don't rely on luck.

    Additional links if interested:

    Carl Cestari: Chin Jab and The O'Neill Cover and other covers

    Lee Morris - Urban Combatives

    Blauer - Flinch & 1st two secs of a fight
  10. An excellent post.

    Years ago I heard a saying that went something like this : if you are tussling with a subject and not actively applying the cuffs, you are losing.
  11. Deputydave

    Deputydave Millennium Member

    Feb 20, 1999
  12. WT

    WT Millennium Member

    Jan 12, 1999
    Here is a link to a short video of a solo LAPD motor officer wrestling with an unfriendly citizen.

    The officer suffered a dislocated shoulder when they fell to the ground. Also some rib injuries. Regardless, HE DID NOT GIVE UP!

    Prior to the start of the video the unfriendly citizen had a head lock on the motor officer. I think the full face helmet was actually a detriment.
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2014
  13. sns3guppy


    Sep 4, 2006
    One really needs to differentiate between control techniques and martial arts, because they're not the same thing. One may use a joint lock with a wrist or elbow in aikido or juijitsu, or one may use just that technique in control of a suspect. Having learned that technique while applying handcuffs or while securing someone is not at all the same as learning a martial art.

    To properly learn a martial art takes years; decades in some cases. It's not something one learns and moves on; it's a lifetime endeavor.

    Learning an arm bar or a trap, stomping a knee, a throw...those are basic techniques that do not equate to learning a martial art. Simply learning the proper timing of a single-time engagement at an advanced level can take a decade or more, even for a serious practitioner. Teaching a new recruit a simple raw technique is not the same.

    Should law enforcement officers learn martial arts? If they wish, sure. I trained for nearly fifteen years in one location where the majority of those attending were in law enforcement in various capacities, including a number of special weapons and tactics officers. The highest ranking exponent there was a dog handler and SWAT officer. He would have been the first to tell you that a great many years are required to properly learn and absorb any given martial art.

    One should bear in mind that much of what passes for martial arts out there is commercial garbage. I've been into perhaps a hand full of places (studios, dojos, halls, whatever) where a "martial art" was professed to be taught, that offered, in which I felt the place had any merit at all. Very, very few. Some are self-festivals for the testosterone-laden, while others are spinning and flipping and yelling in silk robes, the fancier the better. Many give out all kinds of colored belts to make attendees feel better about themselves. I've never seen a training facility that sported trophies that was worth it's weight in wet salt. There's a lot of junk training out there.

    There's also some very to-the-point training which isn't a martial art, but consists of effective, easy to learn techniques for specific applications; this is largely what's taught in control techniques and basic unarmed practices in the military, and in law enforcement settings. Just as most police offers don't turn into firearms experts, there isn't necessarily a need for them to spend decades becoming a martial arts expert, either. If they want to pursue either one (or both), by all means, do so, but it isn't necessary, and it takes a lot more effort and time than one generally might think.
  14. Steel Talon

    Steel Talon

    Mar 11, 2006
    I'm old school (SAPS and Chokes were accepted SOP)

    I am/ was trained in Small Circle Ju-Jitsu combined with Escrima. These 2 techniques blended are perfect for LEO's For defense, submission "pain compliance" (through joint manipulation,) applying restraints "cuffing" quickly. Effectively controlling combative subjects while easily avoiding "excessive force" charges.

  15. Steel Talon

    Steel Talon

    Mar 11, 2006
    To bad that officer didn't find / create the opportunity to drive his helmet into the suspects nose bridge a couple of times. It would if been justified in my book.

    Given the officers injury he was fighting through, and the threats of imminent death he was receiving from the suspect.
  16. bdcochran


    Sep 23, 2005
    Los Angeles
    No - for the following reasoning:

    "Like many other skills, MA requires practice to be even minimally proficient. It's questionable whether or not most LEO will spend the necessary time to excel at even one technique, to say nothing of a full tool box. "

    Why not make the following mandatory as well:
    1. defusing domestic relations disputes;
    2. crowd control;
    3. recognition of 50 medical conditions like diabetic shock, epilepsy to avoid law suits;
    4. ethnic customs;
    5. sign language;
    6. Spanish;
    7. anti terrorism course;
    8. sexual harrassment;
    9. drinking and driving while on duty;
    10. weight management.
    11. a master's degree in psychology

    The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

    It is much better to train how to avoid grappling than to teach people to grapple. The moment you decide to grapple, you lose the advantage of a night stick, a handgun, a sap, a taser.

    Ok, so now make it mandatory and the worker's comp claims pile up. Why? Because the cop with 20 years on the job is required to pass an annual grappling test and he hasn't warmed up and practiced.
  17. The main reason is legal issues regarding the use of force continum.

    For my agency it is broken down in to hard and soft control within the use of specific tools, ie, pepper spray, vs baton or taser.

    The striking techniques of the hard arts are not allowed, however soft control techniques such as arm bars and joint locks such as those used in Aikido and Judo are used in a comprehensive system that is taught in training called PPCT.
  18. TBO

    TBO Why so serious? CLM

    L.O.C.K.U.P. Police Combat: [ame][/ame]
  19. fg17


    Oct 25, 2012
    I support both reality and sport based martial arts. But there are many people that disagree that sport based MAs have little street value. As a matter of fact many people believe that some of the DT training/reality based stuff is dangerous and gives people a false sense of security. The main issue most have with the reality based systems is the lack of alive training, very little sparring/rolling against truly resisting opponents. To much theory and choreographed movements. In Martial Arts like JJ, BJJ , Judo, MT, wrestling and boxing people are being pressure tested all the time. Sure they have to be modified for street use, but many believe training in a truly alive manner is really the way to go.
  20. Deputydave

    Deputydave Millennium Member

    Feb 20, 1999
    Perhaps, but usually that belief is from those not in the field or familiar with the needs of the job.

    Then they really don't have an understanding of what reality based training actually is or what it entails. Or they've never seen a good program or just parrot what others with little/no experience on the net have recited to further their own MMA agenda. Properly done, reality based training is as close to a real life altercation as one can get and still maintain a level of safety. And the opponent isn't an opponent...he's an attacker. Quite a difference. And opponent remains within a scripted rule set, in an artificial environment complete with time outs and tap outs. An attacker continues a full scale assault until either you or him/them are neutralized and/or you've escaped.

    Sparring is great for sport where you have a single, unarmed opponent who is required to obey the same rule set as you've agreed to obey within the context of an artificial environment. For self defense it is not only sub-standard but detrimental to sound training. For all the reasons I've previously stated in my linked article.

    Only within their rule set.