Kit LeBlanc
13th April 2001, 02:22
Hey People,
I am posting this over from the Aikido Board as it addresses LVNR and some other points that should be viewed in CQB as well.
Originally posted by Sillal
****You would be wrong that the sleeper is difficult to get on a subject. In fact it is remarkably easy as they usually have no real training. It is by far the most effective and safest way that a violent subject could be handled by a smaller officer. ****
(snip) Have you seen this to be true in a structured class style enviornment or on the street. If the latter do you have any experience with using this method to restrain very aggresive opponents who are facing you with an intent to kill or seriously injure you? (snip)
I have experience restraining very aggressive opponents, a few whom I can say were trying very much to hurt me, and I mean on the street, not on the mat. While I have only just recently been certified by my department to use LVNR in the field, I have used a similar configuration in facial pressure point restraint (face crank to you MMA folks) on several occasions and found it to work quite well. It is also quite easy to apply even on aggressive subjects. It is a small adjustment to apply LVNR instead. LVNR will result in less of a chance of injury.
I am placing my confidence in LVNR for street use mainly due to its proven effectiveness and to what I saw in training it. KCPD has extensive documentation of its use since the '70's, with all sizes and strengths of officers against all sizes and strengths of suspects, and found it to both bring violent subjects under control quickly and LESSEN the injuries associated with combative incidents. My department has a large number of lateral hires from departments all across the country, and particularly large group of Californians. They used a carotid restraint regularly in California (NOT LVNR which is a trademarked, specific system). They related that they were shocked that we were not using such control methods in the Pac NW because it had been repeatedly proven to be easy to apply and quick to establish control against all manner of suspects without serious injury, if any at all.
So, yeah, it works.
(snip)Also are methods of dealing with an opponents strikes to get into a position to use this techinque taught or deemed necessary in Police training?(snip)
LVNR is an adjunct to other police defensive tactics training, it is not a compete system. Police defensive tactics have a variety of options in dealing with a striker.....hit him back, kick him, hit him with a baton, etc. In an altercation, a variant of the basic transition from front position to LVNR could easily be used to "get to the suspect's back." Most likely, basing this on my experience, you will at some point get to a position where you can use the LVNR.
(snip) In the teaching of this technique are issues such as striking the back of the opponents leg to "shorten" him, and taking the opponent to the ground covered? (snip)
These EXACT situations are dealt with in LVNR training. They also work against the common counters expected from martial artists and wrestlers. LVNR does not make you a superhero, and I do not think that a lesser trained/skilled/aggressive officer will be able to always, 100% make it work against a highly skilled grappler, for instance, but no technique is 100%. Personally I believe that a police officer that is not regularly training at the range and in DT/martial arts is asking for it, though, and no technique will make practice obsolete.
(snip)I'm curious how the training methods of the Police dept. equate to the same techniques trained in jujutsu and taijutsu.
Thanks,
Lance Bogs (snip)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aaahhh, a question after my own heart, though I admit I am starting to sound like a broken record making these same arguments repeatedly.
Traditional/classical jujutsu has a great deal to offer police. I must disagree with the idea sometimes expressed by jujutsuka that it is "only meant for killing" and " too dangerous to use in police work," "it will mean lawsuits, excessive force, etc."
Only if you misunderstand police work. I can tell you right now that if I ever deal with a suspect trying to kill me, he is no longer a suspect but an enemy. I will do what I have to end that encounter as quickly as possible. The "danger" in traditional jujutsu techniques is no longer an issue. I am going home that night.
That being said, why are so many osae-waza, hojo-jutsu, etc. taught in traditional jujutsu? Because they realized that sometimes they took prisoners, they didn't always draw the tanto and cut his throat. Hojo jutsu and other control positions are used regularly in handcuffing prone subjects. For example, a friend sent me a copy of Sekiguchi-ryu writings and traditional pictures and I can find many techniques and control positions I use regularly in making arrests.
As far as "battlefield" jujtutsu, uke attacks, tori defends with an arm bar breaking a joint, and pins. Tori then draws his tanto and stabs uke in the throat. I can do the same sequence, omit the knife, and place the guy in a control position for cuffing. If he is attacking me and I have the right to bar his arm, if I break it, so be it. The degree of injury is immaterial if the use of the force itself is legal and reasonable. (Read that last carefully before you flame me....)
Take the same sequence, only now he goes for my gun. I can use weapon retention/controlling combined, access a backup weapon (I carry knives) and use probably the same sequence in the classical kata to save my life.
I have been shown pinning from different koryu kata from friends in different ryu, and did a classical grappling art myself for a little bit, and found that often these methods are perfectly suited to the control and arrest of a combative suspect. Certainly I do not bar choke (you bet I would in a lethal force situation...), I do not break a guys arm if I have him under control (just like in practicing kata we don't always break that joint even though we could...) in the majority of situations. I do not have to. Should I have to, there are plenty of things from traditional schools that I could use.
Kit Leblanc
I am posting this over from the Aikido Board as it addresses LVNR and some other points that should be viewed in CQB as well.
Originally posted by Sillal
****You would be wrong that the sleeper is difficult to get on a subject. In fact it is remarkably easy as they usually have no real training. It is by far the most effective and safest way that a violent subject could be handled by a smaller officer. ****
(snip) Have you seen this to be true in a structured class style enviornment or on the street. If the latter do you have any experience with using this method to restrain very aggresive opponents who are facing you with an intent to kill or seriously injure you? (snip)
I have experience restraining very aggressive opponents, a few whom I can say were trying very much to hurt me, and I mean on the street, not on the mat. While I have only just recently been certified by my department to use LVNR in the field, I have used a similar configuration in facial pressure point restraint (face crank to you MMA folks) on several occasions and found it to work quite well. It is also quite easy to apply even on aggressive subjects. It is a small adjustment to apply LVNR instead. LVNR will result in less of a chance of injury.
I am placing my confidence in LVNR for street use mainly due to its proven effectiveness and to what I saw in training it. KCPD has extensive documentation of its use since the '70's, with all sizes and strengths of officers against all sizes and strengths of suspects, and found it to both bring violent subjects under control quickly and LESSEN the injuries associated with combative incidents. My department has a large number of lateral hires from departments all across the country, and particularly large group of Californians. They used a carotid restraint regularly in California (NOT LVNR which is a trademarked, specific system). They related that they were shocked that we were not using such control methods in the Pac NW because it had been repeatedly proven to be easy to apply and quick to establish control against all manner of suspects without serious injury, if any at all.
So, yeah, it works.
(snip)Also are methods of dealing with an opponents strikes to get into a position to use this techinque taught or deemed necessary in Police training?(snip)
LVNR is an adjunct to other police defensive tactics training, it is not a compete system. Police defensive tactics have a variety of options in dealing with a striker.....hit him back, kick him, hit him with a baton, etc. In an altercation, a variant of the basic transition from front position to LVNR could easily be used to "get to the suspect's back." Most likely, basing this on my experience, you will at some point get to a position where you can use the LVNR.
(snip) In the teaching of this technique are issues such as striking the back of the opponents leg to "shorten" him, and taking the opponent to the ground covered? (snip)
These EXACT situations are dealt with in LVNR training. They also work against the common counters expected from martial artists and wrestlers. LVNR does not make you a superhero, and I do not think that a lesser trained/skilled/aggressive officer will be able to always, 100% make it work against a highly skilled grappler, for instance, but no technique is 100%. Personally I believe that a police officer that is not regularly training at the range and in DT/martial arts is asking for it, though, and no technique will make practice obsolete.
(snip)I'm curious how the training methods of the Police dept. equate to the same techniques trained in jujutsu and taijutsu.
Thanks,
Lance Bogs (snip)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aaahhh, a question after my own heart, though I admit I am starting to sound like a broken record making these same arguments repeatedly.
Traditional/classical jujutsu has a great deal to offer police. I must disagree with the idea sometimes expressed by jujutsuka that it is "only meant for killing" and " too dangerous to use in police work," "it will mean lawsuits, excessive force, etc."
Only if you misunderstand police work. I can tell you right now that if I ever deal with a suspect trying to kill me, he is no longer a suspect but an enemy. I will do what I have to end that encounter as quickly as possible. The "danger" in traditional jujutsu techniques is no longer an issue. I am going home that night.
That being said, why are so many osae-waza, hojo-jutsu, etc. taught in traditional jujutsu? Because they realized that sometimes they took prisoners, they didn't always draw the tanto and cut his throat. Hojo jutsu and other control positions are used regularly in handcuffing prone subjects. For example, a friend sent me a copy of Sekiguchi-ryu writings and traditional pictures and I can find many techniques and control positions I use regularly in making arrests.
As far as "battlefield" jujtutsu, uke attacks, tori defends with an arm bar breaking a joint, and pins. Tori then draws his tanto and stabs uke in the throat. I can do the same sequence, omit the knife, and place the guy in a control position for cuffing. If he is attacking me and I have the right to bar his arm, if I break it, so be it. The degree of injury is immaterial if the use of the force itself is legal and reasonable. (Read that last carefully before you flame me....)
Take the same sequence, only now he goes for my gun. I can use weapon retention/controlling combined, access a backup weapon (I carry knives) and use probably the same sequence in the classical kata to save my life.
I have been shown pinning from different koryu kata from friends in different ryu, and did a classical grappling art myself for a little bit, and found that often these methods are perfectly suited to the control and arrest of a combative suspect. Certainly I do not bar choke (you bet I would in a lethal force situation...), I do not break a guys arm if I have him under control (just like in practicing kata we don't always break that joint even though we could...) in the majority of situations. I do not have to. Should I have to, there are plenty of things from traditional schools that I could use.
Kit Leblanc