Guns?

Great question...we train and have trained with sidearms for years...as soon as I locate the photos, I will post them for all to see.

Mickey

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Actually I train with guns a fair amount these days. However, our training is situational for soldiers in "too close to shoot" scenarios. i.e. they enter into a building and they are jumped and clinched, or knocked to the ground and mounted. Suprisingly enough, in the clinch, you see many things that start to look familiar to many aikido methods. With a rifle, I see no real difference between that and a Jo staff. We do train pistol techniques, but most of them are designed around protecting your pistol before it is drawn or when the bad guy is trying to obtain it, or you are being dominated and then you must draw it...when to, and when not too! I was discussing my training the other day with a former defensive tactics instructor. Our training differs slightly as my rules of engagement frequently allow for more force, or allow me to pull a knife and stab. Rules of engagement/use of force criteria can affect what and how you train with guns.

My student, Dave sellers who is a cop locally, and I developed a DT for SWAT and Entry Teams Block which basically revolved around using the front hand for take downs and impact techniques while protecting the firearm by swing it back and down. It also takes advantage of the helmet for head butts. If the firearm is grabbed, a circular movement either around the top or around the bottom of "the ball" is used. All technique involves balance disruption rather than just breaking the gun away as some systems do. I believe a couple of the area departments still use the system.

Thanks for the info George. I think we are talking about the same concept, circling the gun slightl with irimi. Pulling the gun away causes a struggle, and can "back up" the others that are behind you. We always push forward into the room and drive the fight forward.

George S. Ledyard wrote: My student, Dave sellers who is a cop locally, and I developed a DT for SWAT and Entry Teams Block which basically revolved around using the front hand for take downs and impact techniques while protecting the firearm by swing it back and down. It also takes advantage of the helmet for head butts. If the firearm is grabbed, a circular movement either around the top or around the bottom of "the ball" is used. All technique involves balance disruption rather than just breaking the gun away as some systems do. I believe a couple of the area departments still use the system.

Amazing that people from different backgrounds pretty much come up with the same stuff. You are describing our SWAT entry program.

LAPD teaches something very similar re: long gun retention.I've adopted that and then go into different applications based on higher levels of resistance.

Hi everyone
Okay this is where we can all blow our own trumpets and say what, who and why it's the best but we all have our own theories. These are my theories backed up by working closely with the prison service here in England and with the Belgian special forces in Brussels. Please remember these are not for everyone so take these with a pinch of salt.
Basically, whether it is a long (rifle), short (pistol) or a midi, if you have too many options there's more chances of getting it wrong.
We have found the simplest (not necessarily the best) way is to always go to one side and react from there. This is whether the weapon is in front of you or sticking in your back.
This then becomes an instinctive movement which may be enough to dodge a round.
Keep disarming techniques to a minimum thus reducing the chance of getting it wrong with too many options.
What we definitely do is when they say "Stick 'em up" we raise our hands in line with the muzzle and palms facing forward. This creates a non-offensive stance to the assailant. This better places your hands for a "grab" as some of you have mentioned.
I hope this has put a bit of light on the subject and got the old grey matter working in our heads. Always here to help if I can.
Be safe

Tony

p.s If someone has got a gun in front of you make sure your sniper friend has line of sight on him!!!

Kit Leblanc wrote: Amazing that people from different backgrounds pretty much come up with the same stuff. You are describing our SWAT entry program. LAPD teaches something very similar re: long gun retention.I've adopted that and then go into different applications based on higher levels of resistance.

Hi Kit,
On the one hand I suppose I shouldn't be surprised when folks who are serious about their training develop systems, quite independently, that utilize the same principles. What I do find surprising is some of the stuff that does get taught out there, for example, the Lindell Handgun Retention System... it's simple to the point of idiocy. Sure you can teach it to a group of motor morons in four hours but it has almost nothing to do with how a real retention system would take place.

The LA guys had a civilian advisory panel for several years in which they had various teachers from the local martial arts community come in and teach what they thought would be useful for law enforcement. Dan Inosanto, Joo Bong Lee, the Gracies, Gene LeBell, etc all got input. They finally stopped because they had far more material than they could use. They put the techniques that best seemed suited to each other and created their system. The last time I had a run through on it, it was very close to my own program which i had worked out with my two police students on our own. I felt quite gratified that we had come up with almost the same thing all by our lonesomes when the top folks in the country had put in their two cents and came up with much the same thing.

George S. Ledyard wrote: Hi Kit, On the one hand I suppose I shouldn't be surprised when folks who are serious about their training develop systems, quite independently, that utilize the same principles. What I do find surprising is some of the stuff that does get taught out there, for example, the Lindell Handgun Retention System... it's simple to the point of idiocy. Sure you can teach it to a group of motor morons in four hours but it has almost nothing to do with how a real retention system would take place. The LA guys had a civilian advisory panel for several years in which they had various teachers from the local martial arts community come in and teach what they thought would be useful for law enforcement. Dan Inosanto, Joo Bong Lee, the Gracies, Gene LeBell, etc all got input. They finally stopped because they had far more material than they could use. They put the techniques that best seemed suited to each other and created their system. The last time I had a run through on it, it was very close to my own program which i had worked out with my two police students on our own. I felt quite gratified that we had come up with almost the same thing all by our lonesomes when the top folks in the country had put in their two cents and came up with much the same thing.

Funny how that is. I trained with LAPD SWAT last year and their combatives stuff was remarkably close to what we had come up with. Nice to tweak some things through exposure to more approaches, though.

Weapon retention is IMO one of the last bastions of fantasy, and idiocy, in LE DT. Rarely do you find a coherent method that applies the same principles to retention, disarming, and extreme close quarters/contact shooting, both standing and on the ground (where a lot of disarms/disarm attempts occur).

I am convinced this occurs because people who come up with retention systems don't train it under realistic dynamics (i.e. the "bad guy" actually attempting to take the weapon), and don't do the work with firearms and non lethal training ammunition "up close and personal."

George,

So are you saying that systems like the Lindell system teach things from a static position, step 1, step 2, step 3? Instead of using dynamic flow and movement?

I have no experience in DT, just what we do in the military (which can be as varied as your various people instructing!).

What I've found best, and worked every single time in a dozen "someone pulls a pistol on you" scenario's I was a part of one day, is just yanking the pistol out of the persons hands. Pulling it forward, down and to the side etc..
Being bold
It always surprised the guy and in one case it was the same guy three times in a row, he never got a shot off. Even if you grab the weapon and don't manage to get it cleanly out of his hands chances are his attention will be focused on the pistol leaving him open to you knocking him down or biting his nose or whatever.

I think trying to wrestle with a gun and fooling around with the safety would get you shot.

I've had the pleasure of Izumi's instruction, but not enough of it. He's always thinking about how to improve his understanding and instruction. At one point (1995), he showed us a kotegaeshi-type defense against a (wooden copy of my long ago sold) CZ75. Then, when I tried to do the same motion against him (2007), he did something along the lines of katate-dori nikkyo with the pistol, and not only was my balance taken, but the pistol was still pointed at my centre. The KISS principle in all this is probably the most important, but I've had no practical, real life experience with people trying to shoot me, so who really knows. (and that's in about 42 years with varying volumes of shooting practice).

If you read the guns n ammo type magazines with stories about knife vs. gun, you'll run into all kinds of experts who will demonstrate in court that if the gun is in the holster, and the knife is in the hand, the guy with the gun loses if the guy with the knife is within 7 metres of the guy with the gun, unless the guy with the gun is a competitive quick draw shooter (who won't likely have his competition rig with him, so he's in trouble), or someone trained really well in weapon retention/use. That ain't me.
My 0.015 cents (about $0.02 Canadian, in NZ currency)
Currently in New Zealand.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: George, So are you saying that systems like the Lindell system teach things from a static position, step 1, step 2, step 3? Instead of using dynamic flow and movement? I have no experience in DT, just what we do in the military (which can be as varied as your various people instructing!).

The Lindell system has grabs for the gun that resemble the grabs we do in Aikido and have as little relationship to reality. The attacks are largely single hand grabs for the firearm. The response is to execute what I'd call a karate style down-block and smash the guys arm away from your holster. There virtually no disruption of the center, no impact delivered to the subject, its pretty much defend the firearm, which leaves the person completely open for more attack if the aggressor has strong intention. I have it on video and as far as I am concerned it's a good system to get someone killed.

A good system would have realistic attacks, such as being strangled from behind with one arm while the subject tries to wrest the gun from its holster. Or gun retention while in the ground with the subject in a mounted position trying to get the gun. That type of thing. Also, a good system would disrupt the balance of the subject and make continuous attack difficult and it would attempt to create serious physical dysfunction (ie knock out, or eye gouge, etc) All of this is absent in the Lindell system.

Thanks George. I agree.

This is a tough one to describe....

I do an exercise where the gun is pointed at the uke, with nage holding it in one hand with one foot forward. Uke puts his hands up with upper arm parallel to the ground palms out as to say, 'my hands are up...don't shoot". Uke then can close distance slowly, or back away depending on the attitude of the nage. (you have to deal with the emotional aspect and get his propriception doing other things. IF, (big if) you can get close enough, then you can irimi to outside, slap (tap) the gun hand at the same time as the iriimi...you effectively take center. THEN as he turns back toward you...you can THEN grab, tenkan, iriminage or whatever else.

Anyway...the important thing is not all the WHAT IF, above....but that you have to take center and position yourself correctly BEFORE the grab or fight for the weapon/extemity starts. Once you grab the weapon, or strike at it (as you know), there already exsist a certain amount of KI etc in that area. I have found without positioning yourself correctly prior to that, if you grab, strike, or whatnot...you trigger a propriceptive reaction that then leads to the next step, then the next step.....hence a uncontrolled fight or struggle in which someone typically is shot or hurt.

I think that aikido does a particularly good job at teaching us how to properly use ma'ai to take center and to close distance with weapons involved.

Thanks for the information. It reinforces what I have learned and what I believe to be true!

All I can say, gents, is do it with Sim F/X, against a variety of attacks, standing and grounded, with a variety of attackers, and tell them to pull the trigger as soon as you move.

Here is a vid with an example of the stuff I've been working lately, the disarms work on the same principle/tactics as the retention, so it is similar. Gun stuff starts about 00:18. In training, its all done with uncooperative attackers, if things go to clinch or ground, 1H or 2H grabs, same principles/tactics apply it just changes a little for the situation:

http://www.shivworks.com/videos/remv2.wmv

Defending the firearm is a good thing. Defending the firearm only, while not attacking the bad guy is a bad thing. Not defending the firearm at all and concentrating only on the bad guy will get you shot or your gun taken away. I teach all sorts of the "physical dysfunction" techniques but tell them not to rely on any of them, because against a truly committed attacker, or one cranked up on what have you, they will often only be a minor distraction. Its the combination of skills that will bring you through.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: I do an exercise where the gun is pointed at the uke, with nage holding it in one hand with one foot forward. Uke puts his hands up with upper arm parallel to the ground palms out as to say, 'my hands are up...don't shoot". Uke then can close distance slowly, or back away depending on the attitude of the nage. (you have to deal with the emotional aspect and get his propriception doing other things. IF, (big if) you can get close enough, then you can irimi to outside, slap (tap) the gun hand at the same time as the iriimi...you effectively take center. THEN as he turns back toward you...you can THEN grab, tenkan, iriminage or whatever else.

Closing with someone without having them realize exactly what you are doing is interesting... since inches count, you want to have your weight back as far as you can, it makes it appear that you are farther away than you are (meaning your feet are closer to them than they realize). Distraction plays a bog role as well. Upper body movement like twisting back and forth while pleading or even whining and crying tends to distract from the foot movement.

It's still really "iffy". If the guy hasn't shot you yet, normally he has another purpose in mind, as a hostage, to terrorize, etc Sometimes the best way to entice him into range is to not comply with an instruction. You still have to role play though... the best way to let him know something is up is to look like you aren't afraid. What you want to do is look like you are confused and on the edge of panic so that his natural reaction is to come closer to increase the force and clarity of his instructions, just as any of us would if we wanted to make a point more strongly. Once you have the gun, then is the time to look fearless.

Vladimir Vasiliev has some great stuff on disarming. Some of it really comes under what the Systema boys call OVCD techniques, which means "only Vlad can do." One of his interesting techniques is the use of a diving roll to cover the distance when the guy is too far away for anything else. Anyway, I'd recommend checking it out.

Walter Martindale wrote: I've had the pleasure of Izumi's instruction, but not enough of it. He's always thinking about how to improve his understanding and instruction. At one point (1995), he showed us a kotegaeshi-type defense against a (wooden copy of my long ago sold) CZ75. Then, when I tried to do the same motion against him (2007), he did something along the lines of katate-dori nikkyo with the pistol, and not only was my balance taken, but the pistol was still pointed at my centre. The KISS principle in all this is probably the most important,

He actually still has that wooden replica, it may be the same one cuz it looks exactly like a CZ75. I think the kotegaeshi/nikkyo type defences are determined by one's relative position(at the front of the gun) to the inside or outside of your body when the weapon is drawn. Which technique is used depends on which is the safer side wrt to distance etc. and better facilitates control of the gun wielder's balance. I use a similar method with one of my students whose job is executive protection. In the end the KISS principle is best imho.

George Ledyard wrote: If the firearm is grabbed, a circular movement either around the top or around the bottom of "the ball" is used. All technique involves balance disruption rather than just breaking the gun away as some systems do. I believe a couple of the area departments still use the system.

We use this response as well it works quite well for simultaneous balance disruption and protection of the weapon while setting up the attacker for a host of powerful attacks including a head/temple shot if the balance is broken forward and downward if that is within ones roe.

Like you guys have said the trick in this sort of training is closing the distance to a place where some sort of physical response is even remotely possible. If one is "in the hole" (attacker's weapon drawn and indexed and yours is still in the holster) at very close range it is often better to use empty handed tactics to gain some leverage instead of attempting to do a quick draw, rock back etc. while still being in line with the attacker's muzzle.

Just my 2 cents. It's good to hear the ideas of the folks experienced in this.

LC

George wrote:

It's still really "iffy". If the guy hasn't shot you yet, normally he has another purpose in mind, as a hostage, to terrorize, etc Sometimes the best way to entice him into range is to not comply with an instruction. You still have to role play though... the best way to let him know something is up is to look like you aren't afraid. What you want to do is look like you are confused and on the edge of panic so that his natural reaction is to come closer to increase the force and clarity of his instructions, just as any of us would if we wanted to make a point more strongly. Once you have the gun, then is the time to look fearless.

I agree. motive and situational factors obviously play big time in it. One thing I try to get across is there are no right answers. Why I like to do this type of exercise is to demonstrate how propriception and "Ki" work.

Usually it is difficult for someone to do many things at once. It is hard for him to concentrate on what he is saying, your movement, and listening to you talk all at the same time. Engaging eye contact helps as well as it is another propriception. You have to get him doing a few things. You might move forward while you talk confused, moving while saying "what are you saying? I wanna listen, don't shoot. he says stop, you can say "What"while moving forward...he might come forward a little to stop you since you don't stop. You might say "don't shoot!"move backward...he over compensates...moves forward into the space.

Sort of like the ole "tae kwon do-two step" where you set them into a pattern of movement which sets them up for that spin kick.

It isn't easy...and may not work....but it is fun to play with and to help people see how you can subtly control through using the various senses of speech, hearing, eyes, space...etc...

We do it occasionally in advanced classes at our HQ.

A few years ago we revamped a number of our techniques based on feedback of some SWAT officer training. Many of the changes we made to what we had done prior involved understanding more about dangers to innocent bystanders as well as understanding reaction times, closing the space, and how to control the gun as quickly and effectively as possible. We also worked with techniques where the basic initial movements were identical regardless of what hand the attacker was using, or if s/he was using both hands, or a long gun even. We also made a few changes based on understandings of different types of guns. Modern semi-automatics, some with integrated safeties, etc.

Basically a powerful opposing movement with one hand as you step off the line of fire the other way. That hand "hits" the gun hand as you take hold. The idea is to be sliding out of the line of fire as your other hand is moving the gun the other way (so they can't track you). You then move in with your other hand going to the gun as well to hold the slide/cylinder and basically use the gun to deliver an atemi up towards their face (pointing the gun up). If you hit their face, well, okay, they're going to have a site mark on their forehead (obviously be careful on this in training). You then turn and drop either into a kotegaeshi or basically a sort of painful nikyo depending on which hand they're using. Once they're on the ground and the gun is pointing at them (if it goes off at least their body will stop the round from hitting an innocent bystander) you drop down a knee into them if necessary as you take the gun out again still pointing at them. This gives them motivation to not pull the trigger as well we makes it safer for everyone else. You immediately step back out of range with the gun pointed at them since a person with one gun may have more weapons. The idea is to teach a simple initial movement that can always be done from the same side if necessary. We wanted a simple method that someone in a tremendously stressful situation could do from the same side (dominant hand if necessary) without having to consider which hand they were holding the gun in.

We've softened up bits and pieces of the techniques, but we had a lot of soul searching discussions on these topics a while back. Some felt the actions were too "violent" given the nature of Aikido. Others (myself included) felt that if we're going to be teaching gun takeaways the primary concern is going to be the safety of bystanders, nage, uke, and everyone else. Yes, if done correctly with full intent and the knee drop to the ribs the bad guy may get very hurt. Yes, if the gun goes off the bad guy is the one getting shot. But guns have a habit of discharging and they don't discriminate on targets. Be it a 5-year-old kid in the next room separated only by plasterboard or a person 200 feet away walking their dog. The primary concern was neutralizing the attack as soon as possible and making the gun "safe" asap as well. That does mean the attacker is going to take the brunt of the punishment if something goes wrong. But they're the ones who pulled the gun in the first place. And this is a truly terrible situation.

Of course the first technique is give them what they want if you feel doing that will make them go away.

One fella left the dojo after feeling we were being too rough on that technique. He preferred larger, rounder, tenkan movements with the gun. Unfortunately every time he did that the gun was pointed at virtually everyone in the room at one point or another as he swept the guy around. Pretty, very aiki looking, but dangerous to every bystander.

Sometimes a spirit of loving protection means the fella with the handgun gets badly hurt or even killed by his own weapon. Because if the choice is that or someone else... He's the one who upset the balance in the first place...

Just my opinions and memories.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Usually it is difficult for someone to do many things at once. It is hard for him to concentrate on what he is saying, your movement, and listening to you talk all at the same time. Engaging eye contact helps as well as it is another propriception. You have to get him doing a few things. You might move forward while you talk confused, moving while saying "what are you saying? I wanna listen, don't shoot. he says stop, you can say "What"while moving forward...he might come forward a little to stop you since you don't stop. You might say "don't shoot!"move backward...he over compensates...moves forward into the space....

Yeah, we do the same things. We bring up the hands in the classic "surrender" pose but train lifting the hands to be level with the gun. So if the gun is pointed low at the gut the hands go up but not very high. If the gun is at head level the hands are up at head level. That needs to be "natural" looking and a reflexive action so it doesn't look like preparation for an attack. But this gets the hands into a position where you have less distance to move and can react quickly. And non-threateningly closing the distance saying "I give up! Don't shoot. What do you want?". You get eye contact to "lock them on" to your eyes rather than your hands, talk, give them no reason to shoot, tell them you want to do whatever they want, but all the time slowly entering into range to perform the technique. So the hand strike to the gun hand happens as you slide off the firing line in the opposing direction. The idea here is to do this faster than they can react. I have tried this many times focusing on shooting (water gun) the moment I feel nage "change" into the defensive art. If done correctly I can rarely get the "shot" off in time before they're out of the way and already starting to take me down. And I've got formal handgun training.

But done wrong I get them every time.

FWIW we also use red guns of various types. We have semi-automatics, large and small, as well as revolvers, large and small. And one of these days I'm going to take a handful of instructors down to the range and have those guys who've never shot a gun blow off a box of rounds to see what it sounds like, feels like, etc. It makes the point about muzzle flash, how the gun works, what parts move, etc.

Incidentally I saw a guy who taught a typical strip mall karate do a demo with guns. He did one where he did this beautiful spinning kick. I would have shot off his nads if he tried that with me. Another one I know of is a sensei who advocates pulling the gun into your belly to push the slide back a little with your paunch so it won't fire. Great idea, I suppose, if you know for sure what kind of gun they have. Of course the attacker could just pull back on the gun hard as they pull the trigger.

Bottom line is that gun takeaways isn't the time for audience pleasing stupid pet tricks.

Just my individual opinions and they are not meant to be representative of my style, etc. Just my opinions.

Good stuff Keith.

I agree I wouldn't think it would be prudent to pull a gun into you. Really what you are dealing with is proprioception with these techniques in order to be faster than your opponent. Pulling at all to me would register a proprioceptive movement on your opponent to pull back and squeeze. If you are not off line of the muzzle, I think you have issues.

It is why I advocate, closing the distance if not already closed as you suggest, moving off line almost simultaneously as you "tap" his hand off line, then he moves back on center, then you can do the whole control the weapon thing as you see fit (kotegaeshi..what not).

I always advocate that there are a bunch of variables and what ifs that come into play and there is no one way or right way that is sure fire, but my experience has shown that you must deal with the propriception correctly if you are to gain the upper hand.

Keith

Your description sounds a bit like what Kelly McCann does (from the written description). He's got good stuff, do the same thing no matter what side/1H or 2H hold on the gun. I think this is pretty critical, with due respect the Ockham's Razor, of minimizing the responses that you'll need to be proficient with when addressing the different positions someone can hold the gun on you.

I'd make sure to let the students know that if they are holding the slide and a round goes off, if they then disarm and use the weapon to point at him, they are going to need to clear it if they expect it to go "bang" when they want it to. Holding the slide will also take care of any post control trigger issues if he does get a round off initially - even if he pulls the trigger nothing will happen if that casing hasn't been extracted - it won't if you are holding the slide.

Of course the possibility of a double feed based on the slide manipulation is also present - happens quite a bit doing hands on gun work with Sims, so I'd expect it as a possibility in reality. Going all the way to clearances of type 3 malfunctions might be farther than many people want to.

Kit Leblanc wrote: Keith Your description sounds a bit like what Kelly McCann does (from the written description). He's got good stuff, do the same thing no matter what side/1H or 2H hold on the gun. I think this is pretty critical, with due respect the Ockham's Razor, of minimizing the responses that you'll need to be proficient with when addressing the different positions someone can hold the gun on you. I'd make sure to let the students know that if they are holding the slide and a round goes off, if they then disarm and use the weapon to point at him, they are going to need to clear it if they expect it to go "bang" when they want it to. Holding the slide will also take care of any post control trigger issues if he does get a round off initially - even if he pulls the trigger nothing will happen if that casing hasn't been extracted - it won't if you are holding the slide. Of course the possibility of a double feed based on the slide manipulation is also present - happens quite a bit doing hands on gun work with Sims, so I'd expect it as a possibility in reality. Going all the way to clearances of type 3 malfunctions might be farther than many people want to.

I'm not familiar with what Kelly McCann does so I can't really comment on that. And on clearing the semi if the gun does discharge is exactly why I want to get some of these guys down to a range. The reality is that many of the folk I know in Aikido circles are pretty allergic to guns. And as a result really don't know how guns work apart from what they've seen on the tube. And persopnally I think that sort of stuff is critical to understanding what can happen and what can go wrong with these techniques.

But yes, I agree completely on the idea of cutting down the complexity of the technique as much as possible. One standard method leaves you with no decisions to make except whether to try to disarm the other fella.

Mikel Hamer wrote: Has anyone ever trained with guns in your aikido? Obviously not firing technique, but rather disarming.

yes.

You might check out a form of Aikido developed for police officers by Sensei Robert Koga, a former Los Angeles Police officer, and who was a black belt under Koichi Tohei in the early 1970's.

My late teacher, Simcox Sensei, was a long time military man and veteran. I don't quite understand all the Washington connections he had, some of which lead to various law enforcement agency training opportunities. I do know he got to test out some fairly exotic weaponry.

And for the record, my brother and I had quite an arsenal in our room growing up, including a .357 magnum and a rifle with a scope, etc. We even had a set up to make bullets in the garage.
So of us Aikido teachers are quite familiar with guns.

Craig Hocker wrote: ...And for the record, my brother and I had quite an arsenal in our room growing up, including a .357 magnum and a rifle with a scope, etc. We even had a set up to make bullets in the garage. So of us Aikido teachers are quite familiar with guns.

And for the record for my posts I certainly didn't mean to imply most Aikido instructors don't. Just that some I've met over the years knew what they'd been taught in terms of techniques but really had little hands-on knowledge of how guns work. I've known many others with extensive backgrounds including military, police, etc.