close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

What do you guys reccomend for LEO's

Discussion in 'The Martial Arts Forum' started by Mud, Apr 25, 2005.

  1. Mud

    Mud

    541
    0
    Feb 18, 2002
    I have trained in some UFC style combat but the place i trained closed down.

    I have been considering Krav or JJJ

    not to sound like a ***** but im not intrested in the Kata part or the forms or even the Rank system red belt green belt black belt.

    i just want to train so that if im in a situation where i cant shoot some one and we are too close for my Baton to be employed that i can still take control.

    We did some take down and Pressure point submission in the accademy as well as some Ground fighting/ Keep your weapon grapling

    any tips or ideas
     
  2. gr81disp

    gr81disp Bushbot v1.0

    474
    0
    Sep 19, 2004
    Marietta, GA
    1) Buy a Level III holster ;f

    2) Muay Thai - striking art that deals with the clinch, that part of the fight where you are both standing and too close to effectively punch.

    3) As always when I am recommending a MA: Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu - probably already trained some of this so you should be used to it.
     


  3. gr81disp

    gr81disp Bushbot v1.0

    474
    0
    Sep 19, 2004
    Marietta, GA
    No, MA=Martial art(s), MMA=Mixed Martial Arts (UFC fighting)
     
  4. Hesparus

    Hesparus

    73
    0
    Sep 20, 2004
    New Mexico
    Small Circle Jujitsu. Non-traditional, no kata, deals exclusively with controlling an attacker. A lot of police officers study this art because of the control aspect and using SCJ techniques on a suspect will not get you in trouble for excessive force the way striking arts will. The techniques we train in are much more painful than strikes typicaly are but do not leave marks or lasting effects. The officers I know who are into SCJ and its relatives have an easy time integrating the new techniques they learn into their routine and are able to use them immediately on the job. We used to have a cop in my school (not SCJ, but related) who would come to class with comments on how the techniques from last class worked for him that week. The nature of the joint-locking techniques lends itself to easy modification into cuffing techniques.
    http://www.smallcirclejujitsu.com/ will give you links to the many dojos and training camps around the country.

    - Chris
     
  5. Deputydave

    Deputydave Millennium Member

    1,830
    88
    Feb 20, 1999
    Florida
    Jim Wagner has a very solid approach for HL work. It is simply this, train in a particular style/system till you have learned the basics. Then move on to something completely different and learn the basics there, then move on again.

    For example, take Tae Kwon Do [non-sport IF you can find it]or some type of linear striking style [Uechi Ryu/Goju Ryu/Shotokan etc]. Take it till you have attained proficency in striking & kicking type training. Then go to the polar opposite such as Brazilian Jujutsu or HakaRyu Jujutsu etc [again one with non-sport emphasis if you can find it]. Now you work the ground game. Then perhaps a Chin Na/Hapkido/Aikijujutsu/Aikido type school. Then move on to some type of kick boxing etc. This helps round you out.

    Hope this helps :)
     
  6. Ducman

    Ducman

    62
    0
    Oct 26, 2003
    I would recommend Krav, Depending on the school, they may have a LEO only class, which is structured around controlling the attacker, not just beating the snot out of him. But they will teach you to beat the snot out the attacker also
     
  7. Vanguard.45

    Vanguard.45

    358
    0
    Mar 4, 2003
    NW Indiana
    Some arts to consider:

    1. Boxing
    2. Krav Maga
    3. Small Circle Jujitsu
    4. Aikido
    5. American Kenpo (Parker System)
    6. Muay Thai

    Some to avoid:

    1. Brazilian Jujitsu (or any other art focusing on groundwork or hugging up on one another)
    2. Tae Kwon Do (or any other art focusing on kicks)
    3. Shotokan Karate (or any other art focusing on deep stances)

    The problems with BJJ and the like for a LEO are threefold:

    1. You are carrying a gun, so while you are attempting to put on the "choke-o-rama", I am pulling out your duty weapon and putting rounds in you.

    2. Being on the ground as a LEO has but one objective- Getting Up!

    3. BJJ is great against one attacker. Not so nifty against two.

    Whatever you decide, make sure that mobility is maintained and the ability to transition up and down the Use of Force Continuum is taken into account.

    We have guns, sticks, knives, and boots. These come in handy!

    Vanguard.45
     
  8. Ironeagle74

    Ironeagle74

    32
    0
    Jan 11, 2005
    So what do you do when you're a police officer and you are in a scuffle and it ends up on the ground with the attacker on top of you???

    This is why you must train in a ground art such as BJJ. You train for the worst case senario....not the senario that you want to happen.

    You can train BJJ with your weapon in mind.
     
  9. cobain187

    cobain187

    65
    0
    Apr 26, 2004
    Watch yourself Vangaurd


    "Grapplers dont take kindly to people who dont like grapplen roun here "



    " Now now, Roundeyesamurai, and MARTIN FISHER.....He ain't hurten nobody!"



    ~rf
     
  10. Vanguard.45

    Vanguard.45

    358
    0
    Mar 4, 2003
    NW Indiana
    "So what do you do when you're a police officer and you are in a scuffle and it ends up on the ground with the attacker on top of you???

    This is why you must train in a ground art such as BJJ. You train for the worst case senario....not the senario that you want to happen.

    You can train BJJ with your weapon in mind."
    ********************

    Your first question is one I thought I already answered. As a LEO, if you find yourself on the ground, your goal should be to get back to your feet. This may involve defending against strikes, gaining distance, or defending against chokes/ holds/ attempts to take your weapon. You may even have to draw your weapon and engage your target from the ground. All I am saying is that it is a pretty dumb thing to get into a prolonged "UFC Match" with anyone on the ground.

    You also wrote that I should not train for the scenario that I want, but rather for the worst case scenario. I concur. Apparently, you are not heeding your own advice, since you are counting on only one opponent. My experiences on the street showed me that you will rarely face only one opponent and that if there are more than one bad guys and they see their buddy losing to you, your head becomes the football and they come in to kick the extra point.

    The arts I named emphasize mobility, potent strikes, some ground work, a multitude of locks and holds, efficiency and logic.

    I would never say don't have any skills on the ground. While training in my Fed LEO training, one of our instructors was a high ranking black belt in BJJ, and our instructor was a realist. He had seen both sides of the issue and was much more in favor of the attributes I named than simply having the skills necessary to choke out a big guy after a prolonged encounter.

    Hope this helps explain my point.

    No disrespect intended,

    Vanguard.45
     
  11. Deputydave

    Deputydave Millennium Member

    1,830
    88
    Feb 20, 1999
    Florida
    Haven't we already covered this in a couple of other threads here?

    Anyway, if your LEO or Corrections, look for Blauer, Lambria, Good, Boatman, Crevello, Wagner etc.
     
  12. BlackBelt

    BlackBelt

    243
    0
    Aug 23, 2000
    There is a group up north that specializes in LE training that are excellent. They are called "CDT". I don't agree with everything that they do (their empty-hand vs. gun & knife will get you killed very quickly, but so will a lot of others that haven't been proven with 'trial by fire'). But most of their stuff is REALLY good for general hand-to-hand without seriously hurting (read-'lawsuit') the perp. They emphasize quickly gaining control and compliance of the subject, and getting those bracelets on.
    Quick story- so I go to a CDT seminar. This instructor grabbed my inner thigh with their 'horsebite' technique, and I almost cried for my Mommy! Man that hurt! It was bruised for over 3 weeks. Those boys were good. I've incorporated several of their techniques into my basic self-defense class with great success.
    Google them up and check them out.
    I think the head guys name is Tom Patire, if I remember correctly.
     
  13. Deputydave

    Deputydave Millennium Member

    1,830
    88
    Feb 20, 1999
    Florida
    CQDT in Florida if you're nearby. About as realistic and practical as it gets.

    CQDT
     
  14. ARH

    ARH

    25
    0
    Mar 5, 2002
    Sydney, Australia
    What do you do when you want to arrest someone who is resisting?
     
  15. Ironeagle74

    Ironeagle74

    32
    0
    Jan 11, 2005
    Vanguard 45, no disrespect taken. I didnt say I dont train for one attacker or weapons. We have three head instructor where I train and one of them is a police officer himself. My instructors also teach other police departments on self defense, and how to detain prisoners.

    I'm not saying stay on the ground, and roll around for 15 mins. You should be able to handle yourself in any situation, with any weapons and multiple attackers.

    One last question to any law enforcement. I watch Cops and love the show, and I know that show is not the end all to how every police office acts, but why in every situation does the police officer take the guy to the ground if all you guys hate grappling and its not the situation to be in? Every single time a situation goes sour, the cop puts him on the ground. And even if the cop doesnt want it to go to the ground it usually ends up there if the assailant resists.

    Vanguard 45 you said you do "some ground" work. If I were a police officer I would train constantly with a wrestler or BJJ guy with weapons.

    Does any of the law enforcement guys on here train on a weekly basis or is it just a seminar here and there? Martial arts takes years to even be good at it and use it in real world situations. Just knowing some "moves" that a trainer showed in some class doesnt cut it.

    no disrespect from me either...just talking
     
  16. Ironeagle74

    Ironeagle74

    32
    0
    Jan 11, 2005
    My thoughts too ARH...everytime I see an arrest its all about taking the guy down. Even when its one police officer on the situation and the person has family or friends. Doesnt make sense to me. Everyone that grapples regularly can get out of a ground situation when he wants too. Its not about chokes and submissions....its about being able to get the best postion on a person.
     
  17. Roundeyesamurai

    Roundeyesamurai Sensei Member

    543
    0
    Jul 15, 2004
    Upstate New York
    Do me a favor, and leave me out of your rantings.

    ----------

    Mud posed this statement:

    Control is the key, here (and Mud, if I have misinterpreted the question, please feel free to correct me). So, being that he wants to know how to affect unarmed control, the list should reflect methods which emphasize this-

    Jujutsu or Judo ('BJJ' or 'SCJ' being the forms of jujutsu which are most commonly found in much of the US, but any koryu jujutsu would also be good);

    Aikido (especially Yoshinkan or Yoseikan);

    There are others, but they've been mentioned already.

    Naturally, 'controls' have an objective of taking the opponent to the ground, where one can better affect control of him. This is what Mud asked for.

    Vanguard's statement "Being on the ground as a LEO has but one objective- Getting Up!" is incorrect- though, if Mud were asking for a method of unarmed combat (whatever that term means) which was not meant to be used for controlling prisoners, then his suggestions would be more reflective of the intent of the question.
     
  18. Vanguard.45

    Vanguard.45

    358
    0
    Mar 4, 2003
    NW Indiana
    My objective in dealing with a person I am about to arrest is to gain and maintain lawful control.

    If I need to take an agressor to the ground, my technique should not necessitate that I JOIN him on the ground. Rather, I am PUTTING HIM on the ground. This can be facilitated in a variety of ways (i.e strikes, baton, spray, etc.)

    If I end up on the ground as a result of my opponent's actions, then my goal is to get back to my feet, or to get into a position from which I can QUICKLY get back to my feet. This would NOT include staying for any length of time in a suspect's guard or mount.

    Again, I assumed that the fellow was asking about training for an LEO which would typically mean that he would be training for an encounter in which he was probably carrying the assortment of goodies most LEOs carry.

    Sorry if I was wrong about that detail.

    Vanguard.45
     
  19. Roundeyesamurai

    Roundeyesamurai Sensei Member

    543
    0
    Jul 15, 2004
    Upstate New York
    Vanguard.45-

    I sincerely hope that you don't take my comments to be derogatory- rather, that you take them to mean that a sharp delineation must be made between different skill sets.

    After reading your reply, and re-reading my own commentary, I'd like to add this clarification-

    Is Mud asking for combat skills, or control skills?

    There must be a distinction between the two, for this reason:

    A police officer isn't obligated to immediately effect the arrest of a person(s) whom he is defending himself against. Now, I'd like everyone to re-read that sentence, in order to fully understand what I mean- 'not obligated to immediately effect the arrest of persons whom he is defending himself against'.

    The implication of this statement, is that there is a seperation between arresting skills (in the execution of his duties), and combat skills (defending himself against attack, or initiating attack in order to execute his protective duties).

    This is where the phrasing of Mud's question becomes difficult to ascertain- is he asking about arresting skills, or combat skills?

    I interpreted his statement (below) to refer to arresting skills:

    With emphasis on the last phrase: "I can still take control".

    As I said in my previous post, and to clarify here, if he were asking for combat skills in order to defend himself against an attacker(s), then most of Vanguard's suggestions would be good ones.

    If, however, I am interpreting the question correctly, then the statement excluding 'BJJ' would be incorrect, since physical arrest (where striking or utilizing a weapon such as a firearm or baton are not authorized) will frequently entail taking the prisoner to the ground (in order to have greater control over him).

    Here's the caveat- remember my statement above- if the individual officer is defending himself against attack, or should become attacked while affecting arrest, he should cease any notion of 'arrest' and concentrate on combatting the attack. Likewise, should he respond to a (violent) crime in progress, he should concern himself with combatting the offender, and then arresting the offender only when it is safe for him to do so.

    An individual officer should NEVER attempt to arrest multiple persons at once. Keep them contained (at gunpoint, if necessary) and call for backup.

    In any event, the arrest is not compulsory- survival is compulsory. If the officer cannot safely affect the arrest by himself, he must concentrate on his survival, and the survival of those around him. The arrest itself can wait.

    Even if the attacker(s) flees, he's not faster than the radio, and there are more officers a radio call away.

    So, I'll reiterate, for Mud's sake- is the question one of combat skills, or control skills? Or, both?- there are a number of well-organized systems which take both needs into account.