Wisconsin

[CO. Hoosier]

Today the presence of police in their uniforms and marked patrol cars does not deescalate situations; today they escalate situations by imposing a threat of authoritarian control where folks just want to go about their business.

There is a lot wrong here. Folks "going about their business" generally have no police interaction. There is substantial research suggesting the intimidation of police uniforms and the presence of several will deescalate a potential violent situation. Most of the time, the subjects are intoxicated or strung out on something so there is not a lot of rationality going on. This is why it is police standard of care to always call for backup at the first sign of potential use of force or other similar situation. This is why 4 cops showed up instead of 1 or 2 in marv's bird video.

Too much authoritarianism resulting from stuff like the militarization of police (no knock warrants, the widespread deployment of SWAT teams and the like) and civil forfeitures has caused this result, not "legitimizing citizen resistance to police".

SWAT teams are never the first contact. They are always used in response to a situation that was not brought under control with normal street policing. SWAT is specialized training and using SWAT is considered safer for both the officers and subject. It's hard to say if there is "too much" militarization. Once again, this is not routine an usually flows from an out of control event, or as standby to a highly combustible riot situation. In my experience and knowledge, the vast majority of SWAT call outs result in a situation brought under control with no shots fired or other violence.

Civil forfeitures are not in the hands of the cops. No-knock warrants are not handed out like Halloween candy. There are requirements that a judge must review.

 

[outside shooter]

I believe that big city officers in places like Chicago or New York basically work in a low level war zone.

New York seems to follow the nationwide trend of being safer than ever.

For Chicago I am not finding the same analysis beyond 2010

Though it is clear that Chicago is an outlier in terms specifically of urban murder rate, and my presumption is that since 2016 the red line has continued to rise.

 

[T.M.P.]

I see your point, but think of some of your hand to hand techniques you were taught. That stuff is police brutality if they do it to a criminal.

In this case, I believe that before the video started that the police did try to subdue him and did try the taser. None of that worked.

Cops "kicked Rodney King's ass" back in the day and L.A. burned to the ground. Kicking someone's ass like you would as a soldier can be every bit as lethal as the gun.

I am just saying that being a police officer is a hard job. Particularly given that I believe that big city officers in places like Chicago or New York basically work in a low level war zone when the sun goes down. I really don't want to see a riot everytime something like this happens. The narrative around this needs to change. I believe dialog between the police and those communities is needed, but it has to be a dialog built on the willingness for each side to change because the police have some valid grievances with those inner city communities as well.

1. No it isn't. "That stuff is police brutality and criminal" but shooting them isn't? WTF?
2. They continued beating RK while he was down.
3. Low level war zone? lmao .... gross hyperbole.

Your fear us making you say really dumb things ..you need to unf*ck yourself.

 

[mcmurtry66]

New York seems to follow the nationwide trend of being safer than ever.

For Chicago I am not finding the same analysis beyond 2010

Though it is clear that Chicago is an outlier in terms specifically of urban murder rate, and my presumption is that since 2016 the red line has continued to rise.

Violent crime is up in many cities since the pandemic began including Chicago. And it’s not an outlier. Oakland, Saint Louis on and on.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Civil forfeitures are not in the hands of the cops

The Heritage Foundation seems to disagree with that assessment. https://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/03/civil-asset-forfeiture-7-things-you-should-know

 

[outside shooter]

Violent crime is up in many cities since the pandemic began including Chicago. And it’s not an outlier. Oakland, Saint Louis on and on.

How much, though? if it has doubled, it would still be far below the average for the past 50 years.

I am not minimizing it, but I am also saying that an opinion like "suddenly we have a war zone situation in our inner cities that the US has never experienced" would be a politically-driven false narrative.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

What does this even mean? The mere presence of a uniform and marked patrol car is part of “control”. That presence is the first step in deescalation. In our jurisdiction, cops are permitted to drive patrol cars while off duty for personal business. The theory is that the presence of a marked patrol vehicle changes behaviors for the better. At least it used to. Those officers are instructed if they see behavior that requires a stop or other contact, and there is no emergency, to call for uniformed presence for obvious reasons.

While there are obvious exceptions, by in large, the amount of control to be imposed beyond the inherent authority of the position depends on the reactions of the subject and the willingness to follow simple commands. That being said, given the proliferation of firearms, and the willingness to use them, cops are more on edge than before in many circumstances. Moreover, we are living in times where political and other leaders are legitimizing citizen resistance to police to levels not previously known. This is also a problem.

The bolded is just crazy to me.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

The Heritage Foundation seems to disagree with that assessment. https://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/03/civil-asset-forfeiture-7-things-you-should-know

In Colorado and most (if not all) states CF's start with a prosecuting attorney. But yeah, the process must start with a police report about holding contraband, cash, or some other asset. With the feds where many crimes involve interstate transportation of contraband, the agencies (ATF, FBI) will seize the asset (contraband, money, vehicle). But a due process hearing follows.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

In Colorado and most (if not all) states CF's start with a prosecuting attorney. But yeah, the process must start with a police report about holding contraband, cash, or some other asset. With the feds where many crimes involve interstate transportation of contraband, the agencies (ATF, FBI) will seize the asset (contraband, money, vehicle). But a due process hearing follows.

The law may have changed, and may vary. But according to that HF link, due process isn't what we usually think of:

Being innocent does not mean that a state has to return your property. The Supreme Court of the United States has held that the “innocent owner” defense is not constitutionally required. Furthermore, even in states where you do have an innocent owner defense, the burden is typically on you. Your property is presumed to be guilty until you prove that you are innocent and that your property therefore should not be forfeited. In other words, you must prove (1) that you were not involved in criminal activity and (2) that you either had no knowledge that your property was being used to facilitate the commission of a crime or that you took every reasonable step under the circumstances to terminate such use. And all the while, the police retain your property. To cap it all off, the success rate for winning back property is low. Pragmatic property owners, however innocent, may reason that it is best to cut their losses rather than challenge the forfeiture in court.​

 

[CO. Hoosier]

The law may have changed, and may vary. But according to that HF link, due process isn't what we usually think of:

Being innocent does not mean that a state has to return your property. The Supreme Court of the United States has held that the “innocent owner” defense is not constitutionally required. Furthermore, even in states where you do have an innocent owner defense, the burden is typically on you. Your property is presumed to be guilty until you prove that you are innocent and that your property therefore should not be forfeited. In other words, you must prove (1) that you were not involved in criminal activity and (2) that you either had no knowledge that your property was being used to facilitate the commission of a crime or that you took every reasonable step under the circumstances to terminate such use. And all the while, the police retain your property. To cap it all off, the success rate for winning back property is low. Pragmatic property owners, however innocent, may reason that it is best to cut their losses rather than challenge the forfeiture in court.​

That's true. I disagree with the article's conclusion. From what I've seen, many forfeitures go unchallenged because a challenge will require the owner to implicate himself or herself in a crime.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

That's true. I disagree with the article's conclusion. From what I've seen, many forfeitures go unchallenged because a challenge will require the owner to implicate himself or herself in a crime.

When I am appointed benevolent dictator, a conviction will be required for forfeiture.

 

[jsig]

White dudes are constantly open carrying and have been threatening to people at protests with guns and don't get shot by the cops.

Apparently they just have be at home and surrendering to get their heads blown off. Google Ryan whitaker in Phoenix and watch those videos.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

When I am appointed benevolent dictator, a conviction will be required for forfeiture.

If ATF seizes millions of dollars of weapons, being shipped to a drug cartel, but there isn’t the evidence to convict the seller/owner, the government shouldn’t run a forfeiture action?

 

[Circlejoe]

One thing you often see in these shootings is that the person who gets shot are completely defiant dickheads who escalate the situation to the nth degree.

If that's the standard, I assume you face similar dangerous situations daily based on your posting history.

 

[mrhighlife]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/jacob-blake-struggling-police-officersshot-new-video-shows

New video showing him struggling with the police before the shooting.

Again 3 to 1. This only shows that those police officers were not trained properly. Unless that guy is the size of Shaq there is no excuse for them not taking him down and controlling him. At best they are guilty of just being terrible police officers and should be fired. So should whomever did there hand to hand training.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

it's a scary high anxiety reflexive matter where many of the cops aren't equipped to handle same. like sope said i believe it's just bad cops more than racism - in keeping with the statistics.

Bad cops or inexperienced cops? Would high turnover rates play a role? I didn’t live in a community with the police problems that St Louis presents, so I never observed a lot of these problems. Often our police were refugees from high crime urban areas. I would think it would take an unusual cop to spend an entire career on the streets of St Louis, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. And it ain’t getting better.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

I see your point, but think of some of your hand to hand techniques you were taught. That stuff is police brutality if they do it to a criminal.

In this case, I believe that before the video started that the police did try to subdue him and did try the taser. None of that worked.

Cops "kicked Rodney King's ass" back in the day and L.A. burned to the ground. Kicking someone's ass like you would as a soldier can be every bit as lethal as the gun.

I am just saying that being a police officer is a hard job. Particularly given that I believe that big city officers in places like Chicago or New York basically work in a low level war zone when the sun goes down. I really don't want to see a riot everytime something like this happens. The narrative around this needs to change. I believe dialog between the police and those communities is needed, but it has to be a dialog built on the willingness for each side to change because the police have some valid grievances with those inner city communities as well.

The King case was bad because it appeared they weren’t trying to arrest him and instead were just pummeling him.

There is zero excuse for multiple cops to not be able to take down this relatively small guy. Basic wrestling or jiu-jitsu training along with practice would have neutralized this guy quickly.

My hand to hand training mainly consisted of Gracie jiu-jitsu with some striking but mainly the grappling of jiu-jitsu. It’s about technique and mechanics over brute strength. In that video and the tragic one of that guy getting away at the roadside stop and eventually retrieving a gun from his car to shoot those police, they were trying to use brute force and no technique.

A high school wrestler could’ve taken both guys down easily. There is no reason cops shouldn’t be able to do the same.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

There is a lot wrong here. Folks "going about their business" generally have no police interaction. There is substantial research suggesting the intimidation of police uniforms and the presence of several will deescalate a potential violent situation. Most of the time, the subjects are intoxicated or strung out on something so there is not a lot of rationality going on. This is why it is police standard of care to always call for backup at the first sign of potential use of force or other similar situation. This is why 4 cops showed up instead of 1 or 2 in marv's bird video.



SWAT teams are never the first contact. They are always used in response to a situation that was not brought under control with normal street policing. SWAT is specialized training and using SWAT is considered safer for both the officers and subject. It's hard to say if there is "too much" militarization. Once again, this is not routine an usually flows from an out of control event, or as standby to a highly combustible riot situation. In my experience and knowledge, the vast majority of SWAT call outs result in a situation brought under control with no shots fired or other violence.

Civil forfeitures are not in the hands of the cops. No-knock warrants are not handed out like Halloween candy. There are requirements that a judge must review.

SWAT teams are always the first point of contact in those high profile “swatting” cases.

 

[SqueakyClean]

I see your point, but think of some of your hand to hand techniques you were taught. That stuff is police brutality if they do it to a criminal.

In this case, I believe that before the video started that the police did try to subdue him and did try the taser. None of that worked.

Cops "kicked Rodney King's ass" back in the day and L.A. burned to the ground. Kicking someone's ass like you would as a soldier can be every bit as lethal as the gun.

I am just saying that being a police officer is a hard job. Particularly given that I believe that big city officers in places like Chicago or New York basically work in a low level war zone when the sun goes down. I really don't want to see a riot everytime something like this happens. The narrative around this needs to change. I believe dialog between the police and those communities is needed, but it has to be a dialog built on the willingness for each side to change because the police have some valid grievances with those inner city communities as well.

I can not speak for all police forces, but I know that out here in a suburb of Columbus, OH, my Aikido instructor also teaches police officers hand-to-hand techniques and restraining / disarming methods. He is contracted by the police department to offer these lessons once per week, and while attendance is not mandatory, he generally does have a decent number of cops there each week.

I have not attended any of these classes, but he has also instructed some of his regular students some of those same techniques. There are two themes that I can use describe these lessons.

1) Flexibility is key. He teaches multiple combinations of moves. While you can have a set combo ready (and they are based upon human physiological reactions, for example, when you kick a guy in the balls, they generally crouch a little and lean forward, which leads to a palm strike to the nose, which forces their back straight again, which is an opening for a front kick, etc.), you need to know many different combinations and learn how to react to their body movements to know which one to apply at that particular time.

2) In the immortal words of Saint Patrick (Swayze), "Be nice, until it is time to not be nice." Most of the techniques he teaches are basics, which are designed to be disruptive, and defensive. Once you have mastered the basics, you move on to "deterrents", which means that if they are not complying with your order, or physically resisting, you can apply a hold or apply pressure in multiple ways to cause pain until the person starts to comply. As an example, yes, I have been taught how to apply my knee to a person's neck to cause them pain in an attempt to force them to stop resisting or struggling. However, it has been stressed to me repeatedly (and in some cases very painful ways) that these methods are to only be used in extreme cases and should be stopped once the perpetrator has stopped resisting. Most of these techniques are also practiced with partners where you take turns performing the technique. So you learn first hand just how much pain those techniques create.

Personally, I think this is the correct way to go. There has to be a step in between verbal command, taser, lethal force. I am also aware that every situation is different and there is no standard procedure that is going to cover every situation. We can always use hindsight and say that we would have done something different, but until you have been directly involved in this type of situation, you never truly know how you are going to react. The reality is often much different than what you romanticize it to be in your mind.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

So should whomever did there hand to hand training.

According to @Cavanagh the cops don’t get hand to hand training. If that’s the case every police academy should be freezing their classes immediately and incorporating it.

It will raise questions about access to police jobs - as some won’t have what it takes to make it through. In my opinion, being able to defend yourself in situations requiring non-lethal response is absolutely critical to public and to police safety. If that means weaklings can’t be cops then that’s what it means.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

SWAT teams are always the first point of contact in those high profile “swatting” cases.

That’s true in those high risk arrests or similar events. I think most of the SWAT calls result from a situation beyond the training of street cops.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

I can not speak for all police forces, but I know that out here in a suburb of Columbus, OH, my Aikido instructor also teaches police officers hand-to-hand techniques and restraining / disarming methods. He is contracted by the police department to offer these lessons once per week, and while attendance is not mandatory, he generally does have a decent number of cops there each week.

I have not attended any of these classes, but he has also instructed some of his regular students some of those same techniques. There are two themes that I can use describe these lessons.

1) Flexibility is key. He teaches multiple combinations of moves. While you can have a set combo ready (and they are based upon human physiological reactions, for example, when you kick a guy in the balls, they generally crouch a little and lean forward, which leads to a palm strike to the nose, which forces their back straight again, which is an opening for a front kick, etc.), you need to know many different combinations and learn how to react to their body movements to know which one to apply at that particular time.

2) In the immortal words of Saint Patrick (Swayze), "Be nice, until it is time to not be nice." Most of the techniques he teaches are basics, which are designed to be disruptive, and defensive. Once you have mastered the basics, you move on to "deterrents", which means that if they are not complying with your order, or physically resisting, you can apply a hold or apply pressure in multiple ways to cause pain until the person starts to comply. As an example, yes, I have been taught how to apply my knee to a person's neck to cause them pain in an attempt to force them to stop resisting or struggling. However, it has been stressed to me repeatedly (and in some cases very painful ways) that these methods are to only be used in extreme cases and should be stopped once the perpetrator has stopped resisting. Most of these techniques are also practiced with partners where you take turns performing the technique. So you learn first hand just how much pain those techniques create.

Personally, I think this is the correct way to go. There has to be a step in between verbal command, taser, lethal force. I am also aware that every situation is different and there is no standard procedure that is going to cover every situation. We can always use hindsight and say that we would have done something different, but until you have been directly involved in this type of situation, you never truly know how you are going to react. The reality is often much different than what you romanticize it to be in your mind.

Sorry and no offense, but Aikido is a waste of time for police. It’s high on the art scale of martial arts. Police need to be trained in wrestling and grappling, period. That’s how you take someone down to the ground, when the whole plan to arrest someone violent is from the ground.

I’m sure an aikido master can kick my ass, but these cops aren’t gonna turn into masters. They need to be able to do single and double leg takedowns and learn how to control someone once down. That’s not aikido. That’s BJJ and wrestling.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

If ATF seizes millions of dollars of weapons, being shipped to a drug cartel, but there isn’t the evidence to convict the seller/owner, the government shouldn’t run a forfeiture action?

If you don't have evidence to convict, how do they "know" the weapons are tied to a cartel and not just someone scared to death of Antifa?

 

[IUCrazy2]

1. No it isn't. "That stuff is police brutality and criminal" but shooting them isn't? WTF?
2. They continued beating RK while he was down.
3. Low level war zone? lmao .... gross hyperbole.

Your fear us making you say really dumb things ..you need to unf*ck yourself.

1. Shooting was the last resort when the guy went to his car looking for....something. The hand to hand combat would be something the deploy when someone is resisting. So when the person is laying on the ground and rolling around trying to get away, it would not be a few knees or elbows to the back to get them to stop, it is MMA chokeout and ground and pound type of things that would be done. So instead of shooting them, they are beating the piss out of them whenever they start to resist. And that is the nice stuff, the training that I assume Ranger received is how to incapacitate someone trying to kill you. You are not really concerned what condition they are in when you are done with your hand to hand maneuver.

2. He kept trying to get up. See my point above. Hand to hand techniques look like police brutality.

3. There were 86 people shot in Chicago from Saturday to Monday night. That is 86 people who were actually hit by gunfire and does not count any attempted shootings that missed. Most of that gunfire is centralized in small pockets around the city. If that is not a low intensity warzone, how would you classify it?

A low-intensity conflict is a military conflict, usually localised, between two or more state or non-state groups which is below the intensity of conventional war. It involves the state's use of military forces applied selectively and with restraint to enforce compliance with its policies or objectives.
​

That is the definition I am working from.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Bad cops or inexperienced cops? Would high turnover rates play a role? I didn’t live in a community with the police problems that St Louis presents, so I never observed a lot of these problems. Often our police were refugees from high crime urban areas. I would think it would take an unusual cop to spend an entire career on the streets of St Louis, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. And it ain’t getting better.

i would say both CO. i knew a lot of dirty cops. more than there should be. but i've not been in that world for a while so it's hard to say. they've done some things to the pension (i think) that may have changed things. when i was working with them a ton they would get half pay at the 20 year mark. then most these guys would leave and try to get on at one of the safer suburban munis. or just go do something else. the guys that would stay on would get aggressive about doing other things: getting detached to dea, fbi or homeland security etc. some of these dudes when they'd hit 65 or so would get 4 or 5 pension checks and social security lol

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I can not speak for all police forces, but I know that out here in a suburb of Columbus, OH, my Aikido instructor also teaches police officers hand-to-hand techniques and restraining / disarming methods. He is contracted by the police department to offer these lessons once per week, and while attendance is not mandatory, he generally does have a decent number of cops there each week.

I have not attended any of these classes, but he has also instructed some of his regular students some of those same techniques. There are two themes that I can use describe these lessons.

1) Flexibility is key. He teaches multiple combinations of moves. While you can have a set combo ready (and they are based upon human physiological reactions, for example, when you kick a guy in the balls, they generally crouch a little and lean forward, which leads to a palm strike to the nose, which forces their back straight again, which is an opening for a front kick, etc.), you need to know many different combinations and learn how to react to their body movements to know which one to apply at that particular time.

2) In the immortal words of Saint Patrick (Swayze), "Be nice, until it is time to not be nice." Most of the techniques he teaches are basics, which are designed to be disruptive, and defensive. Once you have mastered the basics, you move on to "deterrents", which means that if they are not complying with your order, or physically resisting, you can apply a hold or apply pressure in multiple ways to cause pain until the person starts to comply. As an example, yes, I have been taught how to apply my knee to a person's neck to cause them pain in an attempt to force them to stop resisting or struggling. However, it has been stressed to me repeatedly (and in some cases very painful ways) that these methods are to only be used in extreme cases and should be stopped once the perpetrator has stopped resisting. Most of these techniques are also practiced with partners where you take turns performing the technique. So you learn first hand just how much pain those techniques create.

Personally, I think this is the correct way to go. There has to be a step in between verbal command, taser, lethal force. I am also aware that every situation is different and there is no standard procedure that is going to cover every situation. We can always use hindsight and say that we would have done something different, but until you have been directly involved in this type of situation, you never truly know how you are going to react. The reality is often much different than what you romanticize it to be in your mind.

According to @Cavanagh the cops don’t get hand to hand training. If that’s the case every police academy should be freezing their classes immediately and incorporating it.

It will raise questions about access to police jobs - as some won’t have what it takes to make it through. In my opinion, being able to defend yourself in situations requiring non-lethal response is absolutely critical to public and to police safety. If that means weaklings can’t be cops then that’s what it means.

Cops are taught to avoid one-on-one combat. That’s not safe for the cop or the subject. This is why I criticized Darren Wilson in the Michael Brown shooting. Once Wilson was out if immediate danger he should have been calling for back up instead of getting out of his patrol car with a gun.

 

[mrhighlife]

According to @Cavanagh the cops don’t get hand to hand training. If that’s the case every police academy should be freezing their classes immediately and incorporating it.

It will raise questions about access to police jobs - as some won’t have what it takes to make it through. In my opinion, being able to defend yourself in situations requiring non-lethal response is absolutely critical to public and to police safety. If that means weaklings can’t be cops then that’s what it means.

it shouldn't just be the academy. Training should be on going. A national standard as well. Biden has mentioned this. Needs to be apart of the overhaul.

Former Navy Seal Jocko Willink recently said police should be training on different things 20% of the time. One day a week or 2 hours a day. Whatever. But i agree.

 

[hoosboot]

The King case was bad because it appeared they weren’t trying to arrest him and instead were just pummeling him.

There is zero excuse for multiple cops to not be able to take down this relatively small guy. Basic wrestling or jiu-jitsu training along with practice would have neutralized this guy quickly.

My hand to hand training mainly consisted of Gracie jiu-jitsu with some striking but mainly the grappling of jiu-jitsu. It’s about technique and mechanics over brute strength. In that video and the tragic one of that guy getting away at the roadside stop and eventually retrieving a gun from his car to shoot those police, they were trying to use brute force and no technique.

A high school wrestler could’ve taken both guys down easily. There is no reason cops shouldn’t be able to do the same.

It's an interesting concept - technique over brute force. Could be a great reform idea. I have a good friend from college who was an alternate on the Olympic wrestling team at a very light weight class (some where in the 120's or low 130's in pounds) and out of season he loved having a beer or three and challenging huge football player dudes to see who could pin the other. He'd even let them start in the advantage position. He could pin most people in about 5 seconds, everyone in under 10. Technique over brute force is a great concept in terms of both efficacy and communication.

 

[IUCrazy2]

New York seems to follow the nationwide trend of being safer than ever.

For Chicago I am not finding the same analysis beyond 2010

Though it is clear that Chicago is an outlier in terms specifically of urban murder rate, and my presumption is that since 2016 the red line has continued to rise.

Were safer. You are using 2, 4, and 10 year old data. As in, all the data before everyone got on the BLM bandwagon. Shootings are up 82% in NYC this year from this time last year and homicides are up 30%. Your data is outdated.

 

[SqueakyClean]

Sorry and no offense, but Aikido is a waste of time for police. It’s high on the art scale of martial arts. Police need to be trained in wrestling and grappling, period. That’s how you take someone down to the ground, when the whole plan to arrest someone violent is from the ground.

I’m sure an aikido master can kick my ass, but these cops aren’t gonna turn into masters. They need to be able to do single and double leg takedowns and learn how to control someone once down. That’s not aikido. That’s BJJ and wrestling.

No offense taken. I go to the dojo to learn Aikido, but that is not what he is teaching to the police officers. I just happened to have also learned a few of his techniques that he teaches to the police department. I've also taken some of his kickboxing lessons and traditional weapons (Bo staff, Bokken, nunchaku, etc). When / if I get my black belt, I might move on to one of his other disciplines.

What he teaches the cops is a combination of Jiu-jitsu and grappling.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

The King case was bad because it appeared they weren’t trying to arrest him and instead were just pummeling him.

There is zero excuse for multiple cops to not be able to take down this relatively small guy. Basic wrestling or jiu-jitsu training along with practice would have neutralized this guy quickly.

My hand to hand training mainly consisted of Gracie jiu-jitsu with some striking but mainly the grappling of jiu-jitsu. It’s about technique and mechanics over brute strength. In that video and the tragic one of that guy getting away at the roadside stop and eventually retrieving a gun from his car to shoot those police, they were trying to use brute force and no technique.

A high school wrestler could’ve taken both guys down easily. There is no reason cops shouldn’t be able to do the same.

I don’t think the bolded is as obvious as you seem to think. At least not without a toxicology test. They apparently tased this guy and that didn’t stop him.

Now, I’ve never been tased but I’ve heard it is NOT pleasant.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

i would say both CO. i knew a lot of dirty cops. more than there should be. but i've not been in that world for a while so it's hard to say. they've done some things to the pension (i think) that may have changed things. when i was working with them a ton they would get half pay at the 20 year mark. then most these guys would leave and try to get on at one of the safer suburban munis. or just go do something else. the guys that would stay on would get aggressive about doing other things: getting detached to dea, fbi or homeland security etc. some of these dudes when they'd hit 65 or so would get 4 or 5 pension checks and social security lol

Different worlds.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Different worlds.

Oh for sure.

 

[IUCrazy2]

I can not speak for all police forces, but I know that out here in a suburb of Columbus, OH, my Aikido instructor also teaches police officers hand-to-hand techniques and restraining / disarming methods. He is contracted by the police department to offer these lessons once per week, and while attendance is not mandatory, he generally does have a decent number of cops there each week.

I have not attended any of these classes, but he has also instructed some of his regular students some of those same techniques. There are two themes that I can use describe these lessons.

1) Flexibility is key. He teaches multiple combinations of moves. While you can have a set combo ready (and they are based upon human physiological reactions, for example, when you kick a guy in the balls, they generally crouch a little and lean forward, which leads to a palm strike to the nose, which forces their back straight again, which is an opening for a front kick, etc.), you need to know many different combinations and learn how to react to their body movements to know which one to apply at that particular time.

2) In the immortal words of Saint Patrick (Swayze), "Be nice, until it is time to not be nice." Most of the techniques he teaches are basics, which are designed to be disruptive, and defensive. Once you have mastered the basics, you move on to "deterrents", which means that if they are not complying with your order, or physically resisting, you can apply a hold or apply pressure in multiple ways to cause pain until the person starts to comply. As an example, yes, I have been taught how to apply my knee to a person's neck to cause them pain in an attempt to force them to stop resisting or struggling. However, it has been stressed to me repeatedly (and in some cases very painful ways) that these methods are to only be used in extreme cases and should be stopped once the perpetrator has stopped resisting. Most of these techniques are also practiced with partners where you take turns performing the technique. So you learn first hand just how much pain those techniques create.

Personally, I think this is the correct way to go. There has to be a step in between verbal command, taser, lethal force. I am also aware that every situation is different and there is no standard procedure that is going to cover every situation. We can always use hindsight and say that we would have done something different, but until you have been directly involved in this type of situation, you never truly know how you are going to react. The reality is often much different than what you romanticize it to be in your mind.

I agree with that. The other thing to remember is that some of these people are on drugs, which changes the pain response, and sometimes you just come across a dude that is bigger and badder than you.

I just give the police quite a bit of latitude. Yes, always look for ways to improve, but saying "well they should just do this..." is sometimes overly simplistic.

Like in the case of this guy, the police had wrestled with him, then tased him, and he still kept resisting. So do they tackle and beat the shit out of him until they can get him to comply? If you say jo, that is brutality, then do they let them go? And this guy had a warrant already for sexual assault, say he gets in the vehicle, drives away, and then assaults someone else. We cool with that? Also, if we let people just run, you are opening the floodgates for almost everyone to resist.

 

[SqueakyClean]

Cops are taught to avoid one-on-one combat. That’s not safe for the cop or the subject. This is why I criticized Darren Wilson in the Michael Brown shooting. Once Wilson was out if immediate danger he should have been calling for back up instead of getting out of his patrol car with a gun.

Absolutely they should avoid it. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't learn it though.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

No offense taken. I go to the dojo to learn Aikido, but that is not what he is teaching to the police officers. I just happened to have also learned a few of his techniques that he teaches to the police department. I've also taken some of his kickboxing lessons and traditional weapons (Bo staff, Bokken, nunchaku, etc). When / if I get my black belt, I might move on to one of his other disciplines.

What he teaches the cops is a combination of Jiu-jitsu and grappling.

I don’t know anything about hand to hand combat but cops are wearing bulletproof vests, radios, body cams, weapons including guns and clips, batons and handcuffs. Wouldn’t that limit agility? One of the reasons cops are trained to avoid hand to hand combat is to not allow the subject to seize their gun.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

it shouldn't just be the academy. Training should be on going. A national standard as well. Biden has mentioned this. Needs to be apart of the overhaul.

Former Navy Seal Jocko Willink recently said police should be training on different things 20% of the time. One day a week or 2 hours a day. Whatever. But i agree.

Full agree. We’re past the “this is the way we do it” realm of excuses. Shit needs to change and it has to start with a group of cops being able to take down (mechanically not via ballistics) and subdue (safely) a single perp. It’s mind blowing that they can’t and is even more mind blowing that people defend them not being able to.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

I agree with that. The other thing to remember is that some of these people are on drugs, which changes the pain response, and sometimes you just come across a dude that is bigger and badder than you.

I just give the police quite a bit of latitude. Yes, always look for ways to improve, but saying "well they should just do this..." is sometimes overly simplistic.

Like in the case of this guy, the police had wrestled with him, then tased him, and he still kept resisting. So do they tackle and beat the shit out of him until they can get him to comply? If you say jo, that is brutality, then do they let them go? And this guy had a warrant already for sexual assault, say he gets in the vehicle, drives away, and then assaults someone else. We cool with that? Also, if we let people just run, you are opening the floodgates for almost everyone to resist.

That’s a lot of “what ifs” and the bottom line is that these cops were either too unskilled to actually subdue this guy or didn’t want to subdue him once the taser was ineffective.

I doubt the latter and believe the former to be true.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

Absolutely they should avoid it. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't learn it though.

This wasn’t one on one combat. There were multiple cops. That one of them couldn’t have taken him down with buddies covering is ludicrous to me.

 

[T.M.P.]

1. Shooting was the last resort when the guy went to his car looking for....something. The hand to hand combat would be something the deploy when someone is resisting. So when the person is laying on the ground and rolling around trying to get away, it would not be a few knees or elbows to the back to get them to stop, it is MMA chokeout and ground and pound type of things that would be done. So instead of shooting them, they are beating the piss out of them whenever they start to resist. And that is the nice stuff, the training that I assume Ranger received is how to incapacitate someone trying to kill you. You are not really concerned what condition they are in when you are done with your hand to hand maneuver.

2. He kept trying to get up. See my point above. Hand to hand techniques look like police brutality.

3. There were 86 people shot in Chicago from Saturday to Monday night. That is 86 people who were actually hit by gunfire and does not count any attempted shootings that missed. Most of that gunfire is centralized in small pockets around the city. If that is not a low intensity warzone, how would you classify it?

A low-intensity conflict is a military conflict, usually localised, between two or more state or non-state groups which is below the intensity of conventional war. It involves the state's use of military forces applied selectively and with restraint to enforce compliance with its policies or objectives.
​

That is the definition I am working from.

1. He was shot in the back. In westerns they call that cowardly.
2. Yea, that's what most people do when they fear for their lives.
3. What's missing in Chicago for it to be a war zone, even a small scale one, is artillery barrages, air strikes and obviously, war.

This is what a small scale war zone looks like .. Donbass region.