The Law and the use of Aikido.

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[AikiRooster]

Hello folks.
I see some threads as I search through here about Aikido's effective in the street and what not or whatever.
It would be great if we could get a small panel of lawyers, prosecutor's, etc. here.
As a police officer, this is a subject of great debate amongst cops. It is very difficult to justify the use of force, even when justified, your still put through ringer in the investigation justifying your use of force. It is very frustrating to say the least and in my opinion, very stressful to think of the use of force model that has to be utilized at all times. It is very important to always try to stay inside the use of force model in order to avoid being charged criminally for your actions. the way you constantly have to be cautious of that model is kind of setting a person up to not be allowed to be in the mushin state. If a person performs in the state of mushin, especially a cop on a potential use of force case, it is very possible to be charged with police brutality. Obviously, the legal folks who thought up this use of force model have no idea of the type of mindset one has to utilize in order to survive an altercation with a suspect or multiple suspects. Alot of cop's would prefer to get there butt's kicked then to kick butt because there is alot less grief if all you have to do at the end of the day is recoup in a hospital bed compared to strategize in your head how to get out of this mess from a prison cell.
Opinions appreciated, please share your thought's!
Very Respectfully,
Tim!

[Michael Young]

Hi Mr. Nelson,

My respects to you officers of the law. Your's is not an easy profession or situation to be in. I work in the public safety sector too, but not law enforcement. My profession requires that I call on you guys quite frequently. Occasionally I have to deal with a crazy/belligerent/drugged up patient, and my mandate is always "first do no harm." Of course that is all fine and good with your normal everyday seizure or heart attack patient, but not with someone out to do you bodily injury despite your good intentions to help them. I've got an advantage over police, though, if things get too hairy I can take my crew, just leave, and wait for the calvary (you guys). I realize that PD has to deal with those types of situations that the rest of us get to just leave from. Ultimately though, if it comes to an altercation with another human being, you never know what their full potential or mentality is. It isn't a ring with judges and rules. My feeling on it is, better to be in court or prison than in the mourge! I'd rather loose my job than life or limb...but that's just me.

Mike

[tenshinaikidoka]

I agree with you 100%. As an officer myself, I am constantly restraining myself from using various techniques, although I have used pure aikido techniques (ie:Kotegaeshi) on a suspect before. Unfortunately it was an instinct through Aikido to use the technique, and not my academy/police defensive tactics training. I was questioned as to why I did what I did (the person was not seriously injured) and it was justified due to a weapon being involved against me.

People who look at officers from the outside do not often see the stress and things we have to go through to perform our job, so when they see video of an alleged "beating" it is automatically police brutality. Not that ALLsituations are justified, but I think the media and onlookers take what happened out of context. I just feel we get the automatic "Brutality" statements from those that do not understand. And that is the problem when civil suits are brought against officers and cities. You get citizens in a jury that hear these horror sotries, beleive it, and then pass judgement against the officer in the suit. But that is our justice system I suppose. I t would be nice if things changed however so that officers were not put throug the ringer all the time!!!! My two cents worth!!!

Brandon

[p00kiethebear]

I've heard about a supreme court case in which an officer was being tried over the use of a technique and breaking a criminals wrist. The court ruled that the criminal broke his own wrist by resisting the technique.

Can anyone confirm this story?

[Amassus]

That story has been brought up before, search the forums and you should find it.

[Yann Golanski]

In the UK, Police and civilians are subject to the same law about use of force. They have to show that they have used "reasonable force". Sadly, there is no definition of "reasonable force". You find out if what you did was legal when the judge passes judgment on you. That's right, you heard it fine. You get attacked, defend yourself and get sued by your attacker.

Policemen and women in the UK are subject to the same rules and do end up in trouble with it. I've a few session of training for arrest and the techniques they use are not too dissimilar from Aikido. I know of officers who have used Aikido and were not punished for it. But it's always a risk.

[ian]

Even if you are aware of how to break/kill people, a state of mushin can be maintained if your training is about blending (since your body reacts mostly to your training). Although it takes longer to practically apply, you can do aikido in a non-destructive manner which should cause little more damage than superficial bruises. The difficulty is, in reality, people who have only trained for a short time revert to much more forceful use of techniques and strikes. Obviously it depends on the situation, but my point is - train to blend with the agressor and the first response in a real confrontation will be less overtly agressive if the training is appropriate. Yes, this is idealistic to some extent (because it takes a lot of training, and because situations differ), but maybe it is better for your situation than having an uncontrolled aggressive response.

(from talking to policeman I have known, mostly their restraint and self-defence training is minimal and not regularly reinforced, thus they naturally revert to force and strikes).

PS. I'm sure there is a balance, but given the increase in gun crime in the UK I would think it unfeasible to consider that, as a policeman, you should give in to an aggressor.

[Yann Golanski]

I've done break falling on concrete but never asphalt. I know how much the first one hurt. If someone were to do shihonage on someone with full Resistance on the street, I would expect "uke" to fall quiet hard onto a surface that at best is really hard -- at worst, it's uneven, covered in broken glass, has a lamppost in the way or/and is close to a car that may or may not stop in time. God forbid they break their either arm or neck or wrist while falling as then it falls under GBH -- grievous bodily harm.

On the police side, they never give in to an aggressor -- at least I have never seen them do so. They have a vast array of weapons that they can use and they use them well. From the police officers I know, they have regular refreshers on self-defense. Maybe it's different depending on which county you are in.

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page63.asp should give you more information about violent crime in the UK. If you're interested... *grins evilly*

[oudbruin]

Jun- you may want to link this thread to my earlier thread on Aikido and the Law.
****
For what it's worth, if you have a partner or back-up chances are you will have a person who will provide coloraboration to the event of your Perp hurting himself.
If your Perp is drugged up and or drunk out of control , it's a lot easier to justify the use of any martial force- short of a single or double tap to the head from your sidearm.
RULR#1-If you are a civilian and involved in a bar brawl or whatever, it's best NOT to reaveal that you know martial arts, unless you are asked by the nice police man(or woman). Keep in mind that all the cop sees is someone with a dislocated arm and a TBI and a bunch of drunks with conflicting stories
RULE#2 Be nice to the Nice Police Officer- cooperate or your day will turn into a real stinker of a mess.
RULE#3 Chances are if you are in a bar brawl if you throw some poor sod on the pavement or bar floor- he will not want to continue with anything- and may be seriously injured unless he knew HOW TO FALL. Your average joe landing on concrete from kotegaeshi will no doubt have a TBI ( traumatic brain injury) from his melon hitting the hard concrete and bouncing the soft brain inside the hard skull.
RULE #4- WARN the poor sod- that unless he stops, he WILL hurt himself-MAKE DIRECT EYE CONTACT !!!
RULE#5 Newtons law of Physics works in MA situations too! Equal and opposite reaction works , but it's best not to esculate to a lethal response to a drunk trying to throw a punch.
RULE#6- FORGET EVERYTHING I JUST SAID ABOVE, IF THE PERP IS ON PCP- CALL FOR BACKUP AND STAY CLEAR- OR TRY TASER WAZA-IT MIGHT WORK.
RULE#7- YOU ARE BETTER BEING JUDGED BY 12 PEOPLE IN A JURY, THAN BEING CARRIED TO YOUR GRAVE BY 6
RULE #8- if you have to use your side arm, you are way beyond the context of martial arts usage, and you have to apply the rules laid down by your command authority. ONCE AGAIN_ a lot can be done with DIRECT EYE CONTACT- You can assess your perps intents and motives.
********
IF YOUR LIFE IS IN DANGER, YOU ARE JUSTIFIED IN USING EQUAL AND OPPOSITE RESPONSE TO SOMEONE WHO WILL NOT "STAND DOWN"
(IMHO THE MARINE IN IRAQ- WHO SHOT THAT INSERGENT WAS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN HIS ACTIONS-)
*******
-I had a situation this summer while Bluefishing on a headboat night trip- the Drunk was outta control and eventually pulled a fillet knife on me- as i happened to be the nearest object of his self anger/ rage-it was easy even for a lowly 5th kyu- he was moving slow, and I was able to use sumi-otoshi, which worked nicely for the situation. When we got back to port- the cops were waiting to take him away, a few questions were asked by the nice Belmar police- and the Captain gave me a couple free trip cards (all in a days work!!)
Now if I could get that 28 lb Bluefish!! That would be GODZILLA!
All the best to all for a happy Turkey day- and a Special regards to all serving officers and firefighters around the world for a safe day.
Bruce

[ian]

If someone were to do shihonage on someone with full Resistance on the street, I would expect "uke" to fall quiet hard onto a surface

Yep, this is my point - you don't do shihonage on someone with full resistance because you are trying to blend with them. Thus if they are resisting (e.g. pulling forward or dropping elbow), you do an appropriate movement so you are not using force. Is this not the whole point of aikido?

Also, yep, regular refreshers on self-defence - maybe true (several times a year). However this is not enough to imprint instinctive response, especially if you are trying to blend.

As an aside, a long time back at a football riot a police friend of mine was telling me how he did shihonage on someone who took a swing at him, but he let them go and they just stood up and hit him. (So training to restrain people after the technique is also a useful habit).

I do get your point though about if the attack is hard and fast and maybe something like irimi-nage (I generally think aikido naturally results in a harder throw for a harder attack because you have to move with the same timing as the attacker).

[L. Camejo]

Bruce had some great comments I think.

From my experience with law enforcement type students and LEO friends who don't train in martial arts, the spectrum of violence one may experience on the street (depending on which streets we are referring to) can be very wide. The point Bruce made about folks on PCP was a good example of someone who may be immune to anything short of severe structural damage or CNS shutdown. They often don't feel pain and sometimes don't even react to body parts that are seriously damaged and will stop the average person. So situation dictates level of force imo. Right now our streets are patrolled by an Inter Agency Task Force of both military (to provide backup firepower) and police officers. The police are the point men as they are the ones who enforce the law, the military is there in case they get in over their heads as regards extreme resistance.

However, I think it is important that one quickly evaluate the threat level and be prepared to go from "enough force to control" to "potentially lethal" in an instant. Again this depends on many factors, but from what I've heard and experienced, hesitation to apply the correct level of force and inability to correctly and quickly evaluate the threat level is what often ends up in either the perp or the LEO being seriously damaged, depending on who comes out on top.

What I like about martial Aikido training in this regard is that it is not too difficult to escalate or de escalate even in the midst of technique as long as one understands the methods of doing this quickly and easily. Taking Yann's Shi Ho Nage example- it is not so difficult to control the technique in such a way as to pop joints, throw or just restrain in an effort to handcuff. If learnt properly one can even reduce the effect of the fall if used as a throw to ward against a TBI. We do this all the time when there are Uke who are not yet able to receive full force throws in randori, some of the force is taken through one's own body to reduce the impact. However control is still maintained as Uke's balance is still gone and you are in control.

The thing about LEOs and using h2h tactics is that they often do not have the months or years of time to put into training these things. Instruction must be targeted and focused towards the immediate goals of the LEO and taught in such a way that effective, consistent results are repeatable within a relatively short period of training (like a 1 or 2 week intensive if so much). Things like blending are nice if you train in Aikido regularly while being a LEO, but I'm not sure how realistic it is to think that this can be learnt in a manner that makes it effectively usable in a short period of time against resistant, drugged perps who are intent on hurting you. Though every thing has its place and there are situations where it can work effectively.

Just my thoughts.
LC:ai::ki:

[Jonathan Lewis]

For your own legal defense as a LEO you must know the use of force policy intimately.

Describe the threat in detail, including specific words, grimaces or other facial gestures, body posture, position of subjects hands, tactical position, any known history of the subject, know characteristics of the area where the incident occurred, presence of others (other officers, other associates of the perp - oh no, I used the word perp...auughhhhhhhh, others), etc. etc.

When you write up a use of force incident report, go through the entire use of force continuum from lowest level (remember, officer presence comes before verbal) to the highest level, explaining why each level was either unavailable or inappropriate, until you get to the level you used. Go through the higher levels too and explain why they were inappropriate. If you move up and down the use of force continuum, explain at every point how the situation changed to allow/require that. Keep in mind that it is possible to go to lower levels as well as higher levels of force as the situation changes.
It is not necessary that you consciously make all these decisions at the time of the incident. A lot of the split second thinking goes on unconsciously but that does not mean that the decisions were not being made in a reasonable manner. They should still be elucidated in a step by step manner in your report.

Don't forget that something can be unavailable or inappropriate simply because there was not time to execute it, or that you have not had sufficient practice at to make it work in a given situation, or that you did not have the physical tools required for it.

If you are lucky enough to have a good supervisor, think about your report, then go talk it over with him before you write the report. You may find things that you would otherwise forget to cover.

Yes, this all takes a lot of time but is better than either going to court or getting hurt. Also you get faster at it with practice.

A good report will most often prevent a case from ever being considered, or if a case does get to the DA, he will often look at a good report, see that the officer has his stuff together, and decide not to proceed with it.

Also, it is a good idea that you make an arrest ANY time you have to lay your hands on someone, but that is another subject.

[markwalsh]

"IMHO THE MARINE IN IRAQ- WHO SHOT THAT INSERGENT WAS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN HIS ACTIONS"

Care to explain that? Not sure if I get your point. Was the Marine's life in danger at the time?

[markwalsh]

Maybe I'm thinking of a different incident, the one that has been on the news here is the injured guy on the floor of the mosque getting shot, that the one you mean?

[L. Camejo]

Was the Marine's life in danger at the time?

Well he was clearing a house of insurgents in wore torn Iraq.

I'd say that constitutes as being in danger at the time.
LC:ai::ki:

[Michael Hackett]

For those of you who are law enforcement officers in the US, the controlling Supreme Court case is Graham v. Connor. I would suggest you read it as it sets the "reasonable officer" standard as opposed to the "reasonable person" standard to determine excessive force. Most officers are unfamiliar with the case, as are far too many administrators. You will have to fit within the confines of your state law and department use of force policy as well. Your policy may be far more restrictive than either state or federal law, and in a civil case, you are held to the conduct approved by the policy.

The use of force continuum is a concept used for training in law enforcement that shows force options from the least to the greatest level of force. From a dirty look to a firearm. It is NOT law and most agencies are similar, but not identical. For example, some agencies rank the use of chemical agents as greater force than the use of a striking instrument such as a baton. One major concern with the concept is the mistaken idea that some less experienced officers leave the academy with; they must escalate step-by-step. That is not the case, and you can go from the scowl to deadly force without the intermediate steps if necessary.

The advice to articulate all the factors leading an officer to use whatever level of force is excellent, including the idea of recording why lesser force options weren't used. The danger there in a civil case is that the Plaintiff will hire a expert to opine that your reasons were invalid. I just testified in behalf of an officer who was being disciplined for striking a handcuffed suspect. On the surface it sounded really bad, but the suspect was flailing and kicking at the officer who was trying to restrain his legs. The officer delivered two open-handed slaps (atemi?) to the suspect's fanny and was able to distract him long enough to restrain the legs mechanically. A civilian review board cleared the officer of misconduct and the department has included "distractions" in their use of force policy.

Do what you HAVE to do to survive the event and make sure you know the prevailing law and policy well and that you articulate the circumstances completely.

From a PR standpoint, aikido techniques look so much better than flailing away at some dummy with a baton.

My opinion, anyway.

[craig chapman]

All good replys..

Working as a security guard myself, it was only 2 days ago whilst I was on duty on one of my shifts (at the local library) when the local junkies come in (they have a habit of using the place as a meeting point to cause easy trouble)
anyways, i got asked by one of the female members of staff to remove a lad that was being an arse, excuse the language!
so i tried to pleasantly do this but he was insistant to make a scene and started to fight back so the only thing i could do to reduce any damage that he was about to cause was to use kotegeshi. Once he was in this, I was able to remove him, with no harm done to any members of staff, the public or me...and unfortunatly him.
I think everyone in the law and enforcement community should be thinking like this, I know I would rather go to prison then see a young child who is picking his books accidentally knocked over or even killed by a drugged up ****head.

Just my way of thinking

Many Blessing

Craig

[Lorien Lowe]

a first-hand account from the reporter who taped the shooting (http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/112404B.shtml)

[oudbruin]

"IMHO THE MARINE IN IRAQ- WHO SHOT THAT INSERGENT WAS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN HIS ACTIONS"

Care to explain that? Not sure if I get your point. Was the Marine's life in danger at the time?

Mark- I come from a family of leathernecks, and spent the first 2 years of my life at Quantico. My brother served 2 tours in nam and my father served in ww2 (South Pacific theature- saipan et al) and mustered out as a Tech Sargent.
Basic rule- in any combat mission is to obey the comand of someone shouting & pointing a live weapon at you- weather it's in Japanese or Russian or English or German- when someone starts shouting at me I would NOT MOVE, and I Certainly would not move my hands towards my body.
Considering that many of those insergents are wearing suicide bombs- it's a reasonable consideration.
And don't blather to me about the Geneva convention- Those decaped people were/are innocnts and non combatants. Are the insergents excused from the standards that CNN and ABC want to apply to our troops?
Mark, unless you have served- don't start this flame war.
HBH

[akiy]

Hi folks,

Please keep in mind the original subject of this thread deals with legal applications of aikido and the use of force. I'd rather not have to split this thread due to it being too off-topic, so please be sure to write regarding the topic (aikido) at hand.

Thanks,

-- Jun

[AikiRooster]

Ian:

To a point, I both agree and disagree. I find it to be true that many or maybe better to say the majority of cops do not train as much as I would like to see my self. More then not, most of the cops seem to be more interested in pumping iron of the ones that do like to sweat. It is difficult to find many cops like myself whom have made martial training a life long path to persue and constantly refine and try to make better both physically as well as just an all around better person. I am a DT Instructor for my department and this fact is very frustrating for me, double even because when the command is trying to be convinced of the need for more of this training many of them fall in the category like the guys I would be training. They would either prefer to not train at all or some think the brawn from pumping iron is more important. I do think running and some weight training or important. If it were up to me though, it would be a crap load of pushups, crunches, pullups, running, stretching and of course, martial practice. Of course, also, not in that same order. Then after those are implemented and done then maybe some weight training. I do not think weight training should be done more then two or three times per week. Running and martial training should be every other day of the week, cal's and strectching should be done daily. or maybe even I would settle for 5 or 6 days a week. Getting this implemented into a department's program though, I have found to be next to impossible. So, it is up to the individual officer's to decide they want more of the martial training and go do that on there own time, which I have found is usually next to impossible to accomplish, at long term. In my opinion, no cop should be allowed to be a cop without at least being a 1st Dan, I just feel it is too valuable of an asset for cop's for it not to be more important then it is.
The way law is with the severity it seems toward cops and use of force, if the officer performs in a state of mushin it is very easy to overstep the boundaries of the law. I do not think a cop in the American society of law can perform in a use of force scenario in the state of mushin and avoid being charged criminally. When you train in the dojo and you blend with an attack, it is easy to do because you know what is going to happen from one moment to the next for the most part, plus, you do not have to protect your gun side to keep it from being taken from you in the process. A police offcier constantly has to attempt to keep his bearings because let's say you just got the crap kicked out of you by a guy, then you do see an opening and you take advantage of the situation and get control of the subject, after you gain control and prior to gaining that control keep in mind you just had the crapped kicked out of you, or maybe punched in the nose 2 or 3 times, do you know difficult it is to want to beat the crap out of the person you just gained control of? However, if you do, guess what? That copper is most likely going to be charged criminally, not to mention sewed up the yin yang whether he wins or not in the criminal case. This is a very difficult thing, it is not as simple as saying oh, you can still be in the state of mushing and blend with the attack. It don't quite work like that in real life. It's something you can turn on and off and still keep your bearings to make sure you do not overstep the boundaries set forth the law makers of our government.
More opinions appreciated. Thanks for the cooperation thus far.
Very Respectfully,
Tim!

[AikiRooster]

Thanks Jonathon for your lengthy response. Alot of common sense in that, but that's easy stuff, I have already been along those lines of thought. Usually, with this subject, I end up there, it turns out being fact that you just need to do some really good articulation in the report writing process. That part's understood. I'm looking for more answers though. Unfortunately, i don't think they exist and that's where we seem to be as offcier's. Articulate your arse off and hope for the best.

[AikiRooster]

For those of you who are law enforcement officers in the US, the controlling Supreme Court case is Graham v. Connor. I would suggest you read it as it sets the "reasonable officer" standard as opposed to the "reasonable person" standard to determine excessive force. Most officers are unfamiliar with the case, as are far too many administrators. You will have to fit within the confines of your state law and department use of force policy as well. Your policy may be far more restrictive than either state or federal law, and in a civil case, you are held to the conduct approved by the policy.

The use of force continuum is a concept used for training in law enforcement that shows force options from the least to the greatest level of force. From a dirty look to a firearm. It is NOT law and most agencies are similar, but not identical. For example, some agencies rank the use of chemical agents as greater force than the use of a striking instrument such as a baton. One major concern with the concept is the mistaken idea that some less experienced officers leave the academy with; they must escalate step-by-step. That is not the case, and you can go from the scowl to deadly force without the intermediate steps if necessary.

The advice to articulate all the factors leading an officer to use whatever level of force is excellent, including the idea of recording why lesser force options weren't used. The danger there in a civil case is that the Plaintiff will hire a expert to opine that your reasons were invalid. I just testified in behalf of an officer who was being disciplined for striking a handcuffed suspect. On the surface it sounded really bad, but the suspect was flailing and kicking at the officer who was trying to restrain his legs. The officer delivered two open-handed slaps (atemi?) to the suspect's fanny and was able to distract him long enough to restrain the legs mechanically. A civilian review board cleared the officer of misconduct and the department has included "distractions" in their use of force policy.

Do what you HAVE to do to survive the event and make sure you know the prevailing law and policy well and that you articulate the circumstances completely.

From a PR standpoint, aikido techniques look so much better than flailing away at some dummy with a baton.

My opinion, anyway.



Mike:

Thank you too sir.
Have a web link by any chance to read the case anywhere here on the net? Not to mention it would be great to save to my favorites.
Thanks again buddy.

Tim.

[Michael Hackett]

Tim:

The case is cited as Graham v. Connor, 490 US 386 (1989). The 'net source I usually use is FindLaw at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. Good source for legal research and I've found it very helpful.

I agree with your assessment about most cops not training for either physical fitness or defensive tactics. I've had the same frustrations. Most agencies don't have the manpower to pull officers from their assignments for PT on a consistent basis during a shift and any time off the clock must be paid at overtime rates if mandated to satisfy the Fair Labor Standards Act. We had a beautiful gym at work and you would see the same eight or ten people using it regularly after work. The rest went on with their daily lives.

Physical skills are perishable if not practiced and reinforced on a regular basis. The 24 or 40 or 80 hours of basic academy defensive tactics would be a good start if the practice took place every day for even a few minutes. The refresher class of 8 hours every five or six years is almost worthless in terms of skill and expenditure of taxpayer money - it usually represents fear of liability more than anything.

I'm not sure I agree with your position on having entry level applicants being yudansha though. The number of candidates who can make it through the hiring process now is less than one percent of those applying and adding this additional requirement would limit the number to something with a decimal point and a bunch of zeroes. It would be wonderful, but I think I would still have to settle for hiring people with common sense, compassion and a sense of humor. The physical piece of police work is just a small (albeit periodically very important) piece of the pie. The big piece is finding decent men and women who will use those traits I mentioned with a strong ethical grounding.

"That's my opinion, but I could be wrong."
Dennis Miller

[Rocky Izumi]

You might be interested in the National Use of Force Model we developed up in Canada. Go to http://www.cacp.ca/english/committees/details_c.asp?Committee_Id=15 and look at the two files. The bilingual file contains the graphic.

I am trying presently to get the Caribbean police and justice system to move to a common Use of Force Policy based on this model. As you know, trying to get everyone to accept one standard policy is difficult. However, if you can also get the courts and the entire justice system to accept the model as the standard, you are better off as there are fewer instances of dispute over acceptable policy. The same standards apply to everyone and when the use of force incident is clearly within guidelines, you can easily get the justice system to forgo any further investigation beyond clarifying that it was within guidelines.

Most Aikido tactics, whether from traditional Aikido, Koga System, or the Aikido Control Tactics System (ACTS), lie within the physical control spectrum. Depending on the technique, it can be considered soft or hard. There is no question if the Aikido tactics are used within the realm of Hard based on an Assaultive situation. Depending on the technique, they even fall within the realm between soft and hard when just pain compliance is used so they are appropriate in active resistant situations. If the subject continues to resist the pain compliance to a point where he/she breaks his/her own wrist, the officer is justified since it is the same level of force as the use of intermediate weapons such as baton or OC. The problem lies in the area of soft physical control, however, soft physical control implies the threat of use of pain compliance. So, even when the subject is only acting at the level of passive resistant, Aikido pain compliance techniques such as Sankyo and Yonkyo or an Ude Kime such as the common Gooseneck may be justified. Thus, the grey area lies in the soft physical control region with pain compliance on a passively resistant subject.

Read the text.

Rock

[Michael Hackett]

Izumi Sensei,

We have a couple of Use of Force Models here in the US as well. The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) and the Commission on Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA) are but two examples. They are quite similar to the Canadian model. A uniform policy is another issue altogether though. Conduct that might be perfectly acceptable in one jurisdiction might well be anathema in another. The Chief Executive and his governing body have to set policy in a framework that is both legal and acceptable to the community they serve and have to be responsive to the community's beliefs, perceptions, and emotions within reason. For example, I know of a county in Southern California where every agency arms their officers with a centerfire semi-automatic rifle in the cars with the exception of one police department. That department met with some serious resistance from the community and will not issue or allow the rifles. While I disagree with their decision, I recognize that they have to be responsive to their citizens. I simply don't think that a uniform policy is workable on a national basis as it will probably result in compromise that doesn't meet local needs. A model policy though provides a great framework for internal and community debate and forces the agency to examine the issues in the light of day.

[JasonFDeLucia]

I agree with you 100%. As an officer myself, I am constantly restraining myself from using various techniques, although I have used pure aikido techniques (ie:Kotegaeshi) on a suspect before. Unfortunately it was an instinct through Aikido to use the technique, and not my academy/police defensive tactics training. I was questioned as to why I did what I did (the person was not seriously injured) and it was justified due to a weapon being involved against me.

People who look at officers from the outside do not often see the stress and things we have to go through to perform our job, so when they see video of an alleged "beating" it is automatically police brutality. Not that ALLsituations are justified, but I think the media and onlookers take what happened out of context. I just feel we get the automatic "Brutality" statements from those that do not understand. And that is the problem when civil suits are brought against officers and cities. You get citizens in a jury that hear these horror sotries, beleive it, and then pass judgement against the officer in the suit. But that is our justice system I suppose. I t would be nice if things changed however so that officers were not put throug the ringer all the time!!!! My two cents worth!!!

Brandon
as one who advocates the pure control method in aikido for police i say that if all officers would religiously train aikido for the time they were on active duty it would be obtainable that the police force would in some time have an applicable, standard , effective system in purely standard aikido .the system it self would be conducive to civil union.

[Michael Hackett]

DeLucia Sensei is absolutely right. The problem is the big IF. If every officer religiously trained in aikido for his entire career, all would be better off. Most won't because it isn't required. If the department requires it, they have to pay overtime to either train the officer or replace him while he's in the dojo. Many, many agencies are far away from an aikido dojo, too far to train regularly. I spent a career wishing I could study aikido, but was 120 miles one way away from the nearest dojo. I certainly would have, but it was simply impossible at the time.

[Rocky Izumi]

Michael,

I know of both of those models. The issue of developing a common national model is not impossible. The Canadian National Use of Force Model is general enough to accommodate the variances we have even in Canada. For example, the definitions of soft or hard physical control methods differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Furthermore, weaponry also differs. These are not incompatible.

The best examples I can give is that some jurisdictions will allow officer to keep a round chambered while others will not, some do not even allow the officer to keep a sidearm on his body but it must remain locked in a safe in the trunk of his pc. At the physical control level, some jursidictions will allow carotid constrictions while others will not. Another example is that some jurisdications require all use of batons to be on soft tissue strikes while others train mostly for hard tissue strikes.

The National Use of Force Model is not designed to determine that level of policy but sets out to clearly define what is an appropriate level of force at various levels of subject resistance. Use of any firearm or edged weapon will be considered to be use of lethal force. Batons of any kind, OC, Mace, or Tazers are all considered to be intermediate weapons used for incapacitation. All hand techniques, whether lethal when applied or not are considered to be physical control at varying levels. Communication and officer presence should be self-explanatory.

By having a common set of definitions and matching of suitable officer response level to various levels of subject action, it is easier to get common ground on what is acceptable between the courts, the police service, the media, and the public. What each level of force consists of in terms of tactical considerations is another matter.

Another issue is certification of officers in various techniques.

Anyway, this is getting way off the topic of Aikido.

Rock

[JasonFDeLucia]

Michael,

I know of both of those models. The issue of developing a common national model is not impossible. The Canadian National Use of Force Model is general enough to accommodate the variances we have even in Canada. For example, the definitions of soft or hard physical control methods differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Furthermore, weaponry also differs. These are not incompatible.

The best examples I can give is that some jurisdictions will allow officer to keep a round chambered while others will not, some do not even allow the officer to keep a sidearm on his body but it must remain locked in a safe in the trunk of his pc. At the physical control level, some jursidictions will allow carotid constrictions while others will not. Another example is that some jurisdications require all use of batons to be on soft tissue strikes while others train mostly for hard tissue strikes.

The National Use of Force Model is not designed to determine that level of policy but sets out to clearly define what is an appropriate level of force at various levels of subject resistance. Use of any firearm or edged weapon will be considered to be use of lethal force. Batons of any kind, OC, Mace, or Tazers are all considered to be intermediate weapons used for incapacitation. All hand techniques, whether lethal when applied or not are considered to be physical control at varying levels. Communication and officer presence should be self-explanatory.

By having a common set of definitions and matching of suitable officer response level to various levels of subject action, it is easier to get common ground on what is acceptable between the courts, the police service, the media, and the public. What each level of force consists of in terms of tactical considerations is another matter.

Another issue is certification of officers in various techniques.

Anyway, this is getting way off the topic of Aikido.

Rock

i was struck when i saw some military footage couple years ago of first control training .real gokyo ,and real efficient.i knew that current programs dont allow or encourage the kind of intensive programs and the incentive is not there for many.it would have to be intensive for it to work .but it would do the job .problem is that many people in the position to make it possible don't believe it by looking at it .and to accept that the current mma model is but a corner stone to traditional aikido .aikido being the highest evolution of jujitsu in modern times but taking so long to learn well,people tend not to be that devoted .they would rather standardize at a lower price for the moment .
but soon they will realize that more common people know bjj than do policemen and women then they will want to upgrade technology to keep the edge.

[Rocky Izumi]

aikido being the highest evolution of jujitsu in modern times but taking so long to learn well,people tend not to be that devoted .they would rather standardize at a lower price for the moment .
but soon they will realize that more common people know bjj than do policemen and women then they will want to upgrade technology to keep the edge.
The ACT System (Aikido Control Tactics System) is a simplified system in which basic Aikido techniques that are the most street-applicable and simple are put together in a systemised teaching program that takes the officer from basic hand-to-hand to weapons retention, control/arrest/handcuffing/search, weapons use (both short and long arms), CQB, intermediate weapons, and the use of vehiclar force. It was put together by a Staff Sgt. of an ERT/SWAT and myself because we felt that even the Koga System was too complex and did not consider sufficient cross-over to the other areas of defensive and offensive tactics. Once the simple rules/procedures/principles are learned, they can be carried through all the way to use of vehicles in use-of-force situations.

We had quite a bit of success with it but have pretty well stopped because since 9/11, the costs of liability insurance for this type of training has risen so much that we can't afford to cover ourselves. I still teach it to interested police and security personnel but do it within the dojo setting and without real payment to avoid the liability issues of doing as a job. The RBPF are revising their training curriculum here so I am hoping that perhaps they will consider bringing it in instead of what they presently have. I was requested to do a review of the present use of force training and panned it rather badly (technique that are dangerous in this day of rampant HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean and more suited to a military setting) so I may be requested to not show my face around the Regional Police Training Centre until such time as the present troop of senior officers I am training in police executive management take over that division.

Rock

[Rocky Izumi]

i was struck when i saw some military footage couple years ago of first control training .real gokyo ,and real efficient.
I was with the Director of the Texas Tech Police Department when he did a really beautiful Gokkyo on an upset lineman from, I believe, A&M. The other officers couldn't handle the guy and the chief went up and as the lineman rushed him and swung at him, the chief cuffed his punching hand and took him into Gokkyo and into the pc behind him. The cuff was on the other wrist before the lineman could recover from banging into the hood of the car.

The chief straightened his cowboy hat and told his men, "And that, gentlemen, is how it is done." and got into his car with me and we left his men to clean up. As we drove back to the station, he turned to me and said, "Damn, I haven't done that since FBI school. Guess you never really forget."

Rock