How many people also train to de-escalate a situation once it goes hands on? I am posting this thread due to a situation here involving a deputy and a prisoner that is now the subject of a federal investigation due to the nature of injuries sustained by the prisoner.
i think not many people do it, probably because those who prepare are usually already training to react WHEN it escalates.... on the other hand, it's not something easily trained, i mean, there is a huge amount of factors involved, a huge muscular guy will have little trouble avoiding a scrap with a squeaky voiced frail dude, while said squeaky voiced frail dude will probably get picked on by most people regardless of what he does. also, a rapist won't stop following a girl just cause she tells him she's sorry and wants no trouble with him, same thing with a senseless drunk who doesn't know what he's doing. in the end, IMO, it's a matter of charisma, image, and fast talking(or lack of, think huge scarred dude in biker leathers and a james earl jones voice looking at you in a ****ed off way) that gets you out of those situations, and those are things that aren't particularly easy to train
I understand where you are coming from on de-escalating before a fight actually happens... But what about after the blows are thrown? Training the IPC side to use before the fight goes physical isn't as difficult as it appears. It is something we spend alot of time training for at work. But how would you train to enable yourself to stop the altercation once the threat has been removed? This is something I have very rarely seen discussed at any schools I have visited or trained in, but given the legal state of self defense, and the willingness of the aggressor turned victim to file a lawsuit, I feel it is an important issue to cover.
Not certain what you mean by de-escalaring "after the threat has been removed." However rather than beat the guy senseless a powerfull pin after the intial strike can bring him to his senses (or you can cuff him) below a pin applied after a foot sweep and lock. I can suggest to him from a position of strength now would be a good time to de-escalate. regards koyo
Scenario: Subject "A" grabs your throat in an attempt to choke you. You react and subdue the individual in whatever manner your training dictates (takedown, strikes, etc). Now the threat is removed, how do you train yourself to stop instead of continuing to strike the other individual. Here is a link to the news story about the incident with the deputy I work with, which prompted my taking a more serious look into this aspect of training. There are also several followup stories in the news here since this first story aired. http://www.kake.com/home/headlines/15895352.html My point in this thread is that the laws as they are now, at least in the US, have very vague but enforced limits as to how much force you can used when attacked. And if you cross that line, which is unfortunately going to be defined by a judge or 12 people who have probably never been in a position where they have faced any type of physical threat to themselves, then you become the aggressor and end up being the one prosecuted. Given this state of things, I have begun to wonder if others see it the same way, if others train themselves to immediately decrease the level of force they are using, and if any other instructors cover this side of martial arts training with students.
de-escalate the fight I know Liam Baur, known as "Taku" on MMA.TV, did some training of that sort. You might track him down there and ask him. Or even get him at www.hybrid-fitness.com
I teach some form of de-escalation in work place violence scenarios not in the portion of fighting but being able to identify potentially volatile situations since it is very difficult to integrate control to an untrained individual. The act of stopping yourself once the adrenalin kicks is difficult until you see yourself and what damage you are capable of inflicting to the other person. Punching, kicking and beating a person senseless is the least possible scenario to stop yourself but learning locks/chokes/controls, including use of pressure points, can give you a gray area in the eyes of the law. You can inflict pain without visible damage.
well, in order to be able to stop hitting someone, IMO the first thing you should do is realize, early in your training, all the ways you can F someone up BAD, and take consciousness that if you do that to someone, it's gonna have consequences for both of you.
Hi Waya We train in a concept called musubiThis means "the instant of contact" At this instant we must UNBALANCE the attacker with whatever means we use instinctively and this is VERY positive. An unbalanced opponent is (for that instant) under our control. That gives us the second to bring ourself and the opponent under control. A standing strangle or lock would be my choice. You are in a very difficult situation because it is easier to take someone out rather than to control them.However a powerfull lock shall "stop" the fight for a moment and at the end of the day it is up to the attacker to stop before you do. regards koyo Read the report and the thing that leaped out at me was "did not take his medication" and "had mental problems" I myself have had to face junkies who were attempting to push drugs to kids and evaluating how much force was needed in those confrontations was just impossible. I have also taught police and military non lethal take downs. You guys are "fighting with one hand tied behind your back" I have even taught SAS who normally would simply throw in a flash bang half a magasine to the centre mass and a double tap to the head. Now they have to be carefull in case there is a hostage. PC gone mad.
Yes I teach prevention and de-escalation in my self defense classes (krav maga) Ofcourse you can always think of scenarios where you cannot reason with people and you have no other choice than to fight. I've had plenty of those in my work too. But let's face it. A lot of fights, if not most, don't just happen. Fights can often be avoided. With training you can avoid more of them. I do teach my students how to use posture and voice to be or seem calm, aware and confident. Some techniques are intended to be used in this setting. The so called soft techniques are put in the right perspective using this kind of training first. Last week I heard my student was almost attacked after making a mistake in traffic, but was able to stop the guy by remaining calm and confident. If he had looked more like a victim he might have had to use the rest of the techniques too. In my class a very high percentage of students are police officers , prison wards, or security people. Dealing with prevention, de-escalation and the law etc. helps them in their jobs, so i put it in the training. Dealing with your own emotions is a part of training too. I do not dear to give any guarantees in this field. I can not simulate the pressure of real fights for the full 100%. However I do put them under as much pressure as I can regularly and try to get everybody to turn their red button on and off . I hope that as much live training as welll as other pressure training etc will give people the confidence to stop in time. Not daring to let go of a choke for example can be a dangerous situation. Same goes for other holds and striking techniques. Increasing confidence in a fighting situation and being used to be under pressure will hopefully help them to deal with a real situation with more control. mental training and pressure training is fun to do. It's also exhausting so it's a good workout too.
I think that might be the biggest problem with the whole concept. Especially in Law Enforcement, people believe you should be able to be 100% sure before a situation breaks out that you will be able to transition back down the scale of the "force continuum" and not continue to respond as you did when struck. Noone can honestly know that for sure because, as you pointed out, there is no way to completely re-create the stresses of a real situation. Sorry I probably sound like I am rambling. It has been a long week.
Don't know how I missed this thread initially Waya but I did. Being a retired L.E.O. and Correctional officer you know that I was taught IPC, Continuem of Force, and deescalation. Thanks to bad eggs and lawsuits L.E.O.'s and C.O.'s are held to a much different standard then Joe Public. We have to know when to stop being aggressive and move to control. We are taught to meet force w/ equal force but once someone is not capable of continuing an attack, we have to back off. We have to move to control and stop any action that can be looked at as aggressive. In corrections, we were taught that if we were punched and the attacker threw his hands up in a "I give up" posture, we could not respond. We could "control" and remove the inmate from the area but we could not respond to the punch. Not something your would find Joe Public being held but we are held to a higher standard. We both know, as I trust Koyo does, that certain locks and PP techniques can be quite painful and yet not aggressive. The lock Koyo has provided can be applied and held until back up arrives. The amount of pain the "pinned" person feels is controlled by the person applying the lock. He can cause major damage or apply Pain Compliance. Which way to go is determined by the individual and their self-control. A properly trained and confident person would simply hold the lock and not use it as punishment. A person that wants to "send a message" may go further. Taking the discussion outside of law enforcement and to Joe Public, the rule set is much different even though the situations may be similiar. As a normal citizen, if someone attacks me, I have the right to defend myself. I can meet force w/ overwhelming force of the same kind. ie: If a guy punches me, I can respond in kind. Just because I happen to punch, kick to the knee, and apply a joint lock that causes the attacker's face to bounce off some solid object is not that much of a problem. I can not meet a punch w/ a knife or a stick or a brick. Because of my background and training I am more likely to de-escalate once I am convinced I have control. Joe Public, may not. I think those of us that train in MA grow to understand how devastating some of the techniques we learn can be. The thing that we can not know is how an individual is going to react in a violent situation. As I grow older, I might do something much more damaging quicker then when I was younger because I am no longer able stay "in the fight".
I can fully relate to the things you are talking about... Once the aggressor ceases being the aggressor, you can not do anything more than hold them, and even then, for civilians, that is too much force and could result in charges for criminal restraint or worse (at least in this area). The PPCT you are referring to are definitely effective. I use those types of techinques almost daily on the job, and they definitely help to come down from responding to a physical strike.
The article you posted claims "We just want to be able to see him." says Joseph Richard, Edger's brother. "They won't allow us to see him. All we know is that he's in a coma, has five skull fractures, broken teeth, and a tracheotomy in his neck." Skull fractures and broken teeth. De-Escalation is a process that only works on a person that has enough wits about himself to calm down. When force is needed, joint locks and body weight / pressure ( atleast here by the police force ) is added to the lower back ( it hurts if you struggle, otherwise its just uncomfortable ) untill the situation can be controled. I can't imagine any situation that would require such force that would break teeth AND cause skull fractures. Assuming that the person wasn't bashing his own head against a wall, I'd say that was some force that was used. :bang: That being said, I'd say my first stop would be the local library or perhaps even a lawyer to see what force is actually allowed and what situation. It will all be wrapped up in human rights and cotton wool. As you can imagine, the person trying to kill you is on the grounds of human rights, and you are not.
223 You should realise that controlling an attacker is far far more difficult than simply "taking hin out" plus bringing "reason" into an unreasonable situation, say drugs or weapons, is almost impossible. I do not know the facts of this case so cannot comment on the acrions of those involved but I can attest to how easily head injuries can occur when two or more people are engaged and the are no mats. regards koyo
I agree completely. But there are ways of minimising the need for such force. Restraints, not entering the area alone, becoming skilled in situation asessment. Having nothing but the article to go on I was only querying the use of such force that would cause several skull fractures and broken teeth. Perhaps the situation called for such action -- that is not my place to judge. I can only query the use of such measures with no alternatives. A single blow to the head could cause broken teeth and a skull fracture. I would imagine that it would be suficient force to take down most anyone. But multiple would definately be cause for investigation and concern. Then again in a Govt endorced agency -- I would like to think that its staff were trained in the use of force, and advised as to what would / will be considered excessive. If no such training was provided there are issues of accountability.
