Funny!!!

Check out these mugs:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/these-are-the-absolute-best-worst-mugshots-of-2012/

Officers Assaulted and Injured...2011

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2011/officers-assaulted-1/officers-assaulted

Overview

• In 2011, the FBI collected assault data from 11,944 law enforcement agencies that employed 535,651 officers. These officers provided service to more than 251 million persons, or 80.6 percent of the nation’s population. (Based on Table 65.)
• Law enforcement agencies reported that 54,774 officers were assaulted while performing their duties in 2011.
• The rate of officer assaults in 2011 was 10.2 per 100 sworn officers

Injuries

• 26.6 percent of the officers assaulted sustained injuries.
• 28.5 percent of the officers who were attacked with personal weapons (e.g., hands, fists, or feet) suffered injuries.
• 15.7 percent of the officers who were assaulted with knives or other cutting instruments were injured.
• 9.4 percent of officers who were attacked with firearms were injured.
• 22.3 percent of officers who were attacked with other dangerous weapons were injured.

OODA loop

A simple definition of Boyd's O.O.D.A. cycle / loop:

The OODA loop is a decision making model developed by US Air Force Colonel John Boyd. It is also known as the OODA cycle or Boyd’s loop. It is a concept that has been strategically applied at individual as well as group levels. Understanding the OODA loop allows officers to prepare general tactics for commonly encountered situations as well as specific tactics when detailed circumstances are known ahead of time.

Concept

A simple OODA loop can be graphically represented as this:



In this process every combatant observes the situation, orients himself, decides what to do, and does it. Then the process repeats itself.

• Observe means to know what is happening through any of your five senses, not just sight.
• Orient means to understand the meaning of what you observed. When a suspect does the “felony stretch” looking for a direction to flee as he stretches his arms overhead, an experienced officer realizes the suspect is about to take off running.
• Decide is weighing the options available and picking one.
• Act is carrying out the decision.

The Tueller Drill Revisited

The Tueller Drill Revisited:
The classic "21' Rule" article: read more at the link:
http://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/the-tueller-drill-revisited

Classic training video....

This is a classic training video.  Follow the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9igSoJHEdUo

The Nature of Character

Excerpt from the W.I.N.-ing Mindset Newsletter:

The Nature of Character

Abraham Lincoln was very concerned with character, but he was also
aware of the importance of having a good reputation. He explained
the difference this way: "Character is like a tree and reputation
like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the
real thing."

Put another way, your reputation is what people think of you. Your
character is what you actually are.

Rubber Training knives

Here is the link to the Cold Steel rubber training knives I use in class.  It is the cheapest I have found.  If you know of a better price/store, please share:

http://www.888knivesrus.com/c=j04v6b9U5V3BdRPYLcRchhNs1/product/CS92R13RT/Cold-Steel-Recon-Tanto-Rubber-Training-Knife-12-14-Ov.html

Legal Blade Length and....

To view online, follow the link:
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/Colorado/

Here is an excerpt with the Knife related areas highlighted:

Title 18 Criminal Code; Article 12 Offenses Relating to Firearms and Weapons         

18-12-101. Definitions - peace officer affirmative defense.

(1) As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires:

(a) "Adult" means any person eighteen years of age or older.

(a.3) "Ballistic knife" means any knife that has a blade which is forcefully projected from the handle by means of a spring-loaded device or explosive charge.

(a.5) "Blackjack" includes any billy, sand club, sandbag, or other hand-operated striking weapon consisting, at the striking end, of an encased piece of lead or other heavy substance and, at the handle end, a strap or springy shaft which increases the force of impact.

(b) "Bomb" means any explosive or incendiary device or molotov cocktail as defined in section 9-7-103, C.R.S., or any chemical device which causes or can cause an explosion, which is not specifically designed for lawful and legitimate use in the hands of its possessor.

(c) "Firearm silencer" means any instrument, attachment, weapon, or appliance for causing the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol, or other firearm to be silent or intended to lessen or muffle the noise of the firing of any such weapon.

(d) "Gas gun" means a device designed for projecting gas-filled projectiles which release their contents after having been projected from the device and includes projectiles designed for use in such a device.

(e) "Gravity knife" means any knife that has a blade released from the handle or sheath thereof by the force of gravity or the application of centrifugal force.

(e.5) "Handgun" means a pistol, revolver, or other firearm of any description, loaded or unloaded, from which any shot, bullet, or other missile can be discharged, the length of the barrel of which, not including any revolving, detachable, or magazine breech, does not exceed twelve inches.

(e.7) "Juvenile" means any person under the age of eighteen years.

(f) "Knife" means any dagger, dirk, knife, or stiletto with a blade over three and one-half inches in length, or any other dangerous instrument capable of inflicting cutting, stabbing, or tearing wounds, but does not include a hunting or fishing knife carried for sports use. The issue that a knife is a hunting or fishing knife must be raised as an affirmative defense.

(g) "Machine gun" means any firearm, whatever its size and usual designation, that shoots automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

(h) "Short rifle" means a rifle having a barrel less than sixteen inches long or an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.

(i) "Short shotgun" means a shotgun having a barrel or barrels less than eighteen inches long or an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.

(i.5) "Stun gun" means a device capable of temporarily immobilizing a person by the infliction of an electrical charge.

(j) "Switchblade knife" means any knife, the blade of which opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring, or other device in its handle.

(2) It shall be an affirmative defense to any provision of this article that the act was committed by a peace officer in the lawful discharge of his duties.

18-12-105. Unlawfully carrying a concealed weapon - unlawful possession of weapons.

(1) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if such person knowingly and unlawfully:

(a) Carries a knife concealed on or about his or her person; or

(b) Carries a firearm concealed on or about his or her person; or

(c) Without legal authority, carries, brings, or has in such person's possession a firearm or any explosive, incendiary, or other dangerous device on the property of or within any building in which the chambers, galleries, or offices of the general assembly, or either house thereof, are located, or in which a legislative hearing or meeting is being or is to be conducted, or in which the official office of any member, officer, or employee of the general assembly is located.

(d) (Deleted by amendment, L. 93, p. 964, § 1, effective July 1, 1993.)

(2) It shall not be an offense if the defendant was:

(a) A person in his or her own dwelling or place of business or on property owned or under his or her control at the time of the act of carrying; or

(b) A person in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance who carries a weapon for lawful protection of such person's or another's person or property while traveling; or

(c) A person who, at the time of carrying a concealed weapon, held a valid written permit to carry a concealed weapon issued pursuant to section 18-12-105.1, as it existed prior to its repeal, or, if the weapon involved was a handgun, held a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun or a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to part 2 of this article; except that it shall be an offense under this section if the person was carrying a concealed handgun in violation of the provisions of section 18-12-214; or

(d) A peace officer, as described in section 16-2.5-101, C.R.S., when carrying a weapon in conformance with the policy of the employing agency as provided in section 16-2.5-101 (2), C.R.S.; or

Boot and Neck knives

I have had some inquiries about what knives I carry on my low-level and high-level postions.  Here are some ideas:

The boot knife that I carried for many years (and still do) is the Cold Steel “Safe Keeper”. Here is a link to a web-site that I have found to have the best prices.

http://www.trueswords.com/cold-steel-safe-maker-push-dagger-12bs-p-4178.html

 

I have a Cold Steel “Para-Edge” that I carry for a neck knife.  However , I don’t think they make it anymore.  Another one I have looked at and will probably buy soon is the Cold Steel: “Double Agent II Neck Knife”. Again, here is a link:

http://www.trueswords.com/cold-steel-double-agent-neck-knife-p-4160.html

 

What makes an effective instructor?

All:

I am in the process of writing an article about Combatives Instructors; and how they might differ from other non-combatives instructors. What it takes to be an effective Combatives instructor and so on. I consider “Combatives” to be the skills areas: Hand-to-hand, ground tactics, edged weapons, and firearms.

 If you have had an outstanding student learning experience because of the way an instructor taught one of your classes, interacted with you or presented the material, I would appreciate it if you would share that experience with me.

I am trying to collect data from various personal experiences to support and/or contrast the research I am doing.  You can include specifics (course titles, instructors names and locations) if you wish; or you can make it anonymous. Thank you in advance for your input. I will of course, share the article with everyone who contributes, upon completion.

 

Thanks,

 

Jeff

food for thought

Catching up on some reading today and came across two entries/quotes that jumped out at me. Thought I would share.

1. "Let people feel the weight of who you are. And let them deal with it." Wonderful! In a PC driven world, people are afraid to be true to themselves and shine their individuality.

2. Matt 11:12 "The kingdom of heaven suffers violence," said Jesus, "and violent men take it by force".  Heaven is occupied and held by men who portray masculine aggression. i.e. Warriors. Not wimpy, passive emasculated shells of men. Celebrate your wildness and dangerous side.

Review: Stab to Slash attack

Here is a brief video review of the Stab to Slash attack with all seven lines:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsd0cu_F8lI

Arrest Control Trainers

All:

As some of you may know, I am the founder and VP of the Association of Arrest Control Trainers (AACT). If you are an agency instructor in combatives training around AC/DT training, this is an excellent group to join and become involved in.

I would like to invite you to the next meeting which is scheduled for Thursday, January 31 at 13:00 hours at the Northglenn Police Department. The address is: 11701 Community Center Dr Northglenn, CO 80233

During this meeting we will recap 2012, the Cop-Fit challenge, discuss Duty-to-Train issues relative to arrest control/defensive tactics training and have general discussion. I hope to see you there. Please let me know if you have any questions.

The web-site for AACT is: www.co-aact.com

The e-mail contact is either me or co.aact@gmail.com

Performing Under Pressure

Performing under pressure: Gaze control, decision making and shooting performance of elite and rookie police officers.

To read the entire article, follow the link:
http://www.forcescience.org/performingunderpressure.html

Winning in combat: The Ness Brothers mindset

"Spaulding does it with the remarkable true story of two officers. Both trained under the same state curriculum. Both worked the street — just 40 miles apart — in cities with similar demographics. Both were tested early in their careers by life-threatening conflicts. Tragically for one, that’s where the similarities end."

Read more at the link:

http://www.policeone.com/officer-shootings/articles/1959502-Winning-in-combat-The-Ness-Brothers-mindset/

Prepare your mind for where your body may have to go

Excerpt from Brian Willis on Policeone.com

Prepare your mind for where your body may have to go. Simple, but not easy.
This great saying from LAPD officer Stacy Lim is simple, but not easy. You need to imagine being in and winning those gunfights. You need to imagine shooting someone from inches away. You need to imagine shot, stabbed or otherwise injured, staying focused, staying in the fight and winning the fight. The easy thing to do is tell yourself it will never happen to you. The easy thing to do is make excuse that you are not going to imagine getting shot or stabbed because that means you screwed up.
Getting shot does not mean you screwed up. It simply means you have been shot. The realities of action versus reaction are that the first indication you may have that you are in a gunfight is when you get shot. The same with getting stabbed. Training your mind can be as simple as closing your eyes and imagining yourself in a variety of these situations. Imagine responding the way you would most like to and imagine feeling good after knowing that you performed well and saved a life.
If every officer and every trainer in North America focused on these simple strategies, the number of line-of-duty deaths would drop dramatically. In 2012, are you going to focus on the simple, or the easy?

Is the 21-Foot Rule still valid?

Is the 21-Foot rule still valid when dealing with a subject armed with a knife?

Force Science News #17: follow the link to read more.....

http://www.forcescience.org/fsinews/2005/04/remember-to-register-for-the-upcoming-force-science-seminar/

TKO-recap on Grips and the 7 lines

Short video on the two types of Grips and the Seven Lines of Attack taught in the Basic User Tactical Knife Options course......

Police: Grandmother Stabbed to Death with BBQ Fork

Another bizarre story.

http://ktla.com/2012/12/17/police-grandmother-stabbed-to-death-with-bbq-fork/

Police shoot man with knife

Watch the video at the link:

http://www.policeone.com/investigations/articles/6066157-Video-released-of-Mich-police-shooting-crazed-man/

Why so many shots? Remember about reaction time and that it takes equal reaction time to stop an action as it does to start it. Also, listen to the publics perception...:(

Duty to Train case history review

For more on a good case history on the Duty to Train officers, follow the link:

http://www.patc.com/weeklyarticles/print/uof-training-liability.pdf

A Lack of Training May Lead to Liability

Despite this article not being about Knife Tactics, it sheds light on what is focused on in a Failure to Train or Duty to Train law suit. Remember the S.A.I.D. acronym: Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands. It means that an officer must train for the imposed (read possible) demands of the job. That means that if an Officer “Knowingly” carries a weapon “knowing” that there is a possibility the he/she will have to use it, they MUST train with it. Key points are “documented training” and on-going, regular training for “high liability” skills that diminish over time.

A Lack of Training May Lead to Liability

http://www.policelink.com/training/articles/2743-a-lack-of-in-service-training-may-lead-to-liability

 

In Lewis v. City of Chicago, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7482 (Ill. N. District 2005), a federal trial court set forth the importance of in-service training with respect to restraint and control tactics. Christopher Hicks died during the course of his arrest on May 26, 2004. His death was ruled a homicide and the cause of death was listed as asphyxiation due to restraint. The restraint as alleged by Hicks’ estate was a choke-hold. The involved officer, Louis Soto, acknowledged that he had Hicks in a choke-hold but denies having choked him. The issue in this decision focuses on training conducted by the Chicago Police Department. Officer Soto attended the police academy in 1977. At that time, the department trained officer in a “choke-hold” or “sleeper-hold” in which pressure was put on the subject’s carotid artery until the subject lost consciousness. Neck restraints and choke-holds were trained to Chicago officers until 1983 when, due to public concerns, the department discontinued training on these restraints, which the department decided were too dangerous to citizens. Officer Soto attended the police academy in 1977 and thus, was trained in the choke-hold. Current agency training at the entry-level prohibits use of neck-restraints.

In reviewing the training at issue in this case, the court focused on whether Officer Soto had received any additional training on restraint and control tactics after he graduated from the police academy in 1977. The court noted that most of the City of Chicago Police Department’s in-service occurred at roll-call and was conducted by way of streaming-video and lecture. Although the department indicated that it had conducted training on current use of force policies, there was no documentation that Officer Soto received this training. Officer Soto indicated that he had been told about the prohibition on neck restraint, but could not remember who told him or when and could not remember what tactics he had received training on in 1977.

The court concluded that two closely-related training issues should go forward in this case. First, a jury may conclude that the department had (1)failed to retrain Officer Soto on a tactic which the agency had concluded was too dangerous. Secondly, the court considered the argument that defensive tactics skills diminish over time and thus, the City may have failed in an obligation to conduct regular in-service training on restraint and control tactics.

Key Points:

• Agencies must regularly update officers who are beyond the entry-level as tactics change.

• Agencies must regularly conduct in-service training in the high-liability skills which diminish over time without regular training.

Reaction Time Study

New study on reaction time by ForceScience:
http://www.policeone.com/law-enforcement-newsletter/Calibre-Press-Newsline-05-26-11

Video: Officer fatally shoots knife-wielding man

http://www.policeone.com/investigations/articles/6064004-Video-Officer-fatally-shoots-knife-wielding-man/

Police say the officer opened fire after seeing the suspect was holding a knife as he exited his truck

The Flinch

In class we talk about the “Flinch/Wedge” response. The Flinch portion is a natural reflex-response. Remember that “responses” are faster than “re-actions” because you bypass the reactionary-sequence which takes approximately 1.5 - 3.0 seconds to complete for the average person.

The Flinch is the initial reflex response to a threat/movement coming at you. Your brain perceives a threat stimulus / such as a spontaneous movement towards your face/head. The Limbic system activates and you will instinctively put your arms/hands (extensors) up and between you and the perceived threat. This is the mind and body’s attempt to create a barrier and thus space, between your core and the threat.

Bio-mechanics of a Slash Attack

 

 

Slash wounds occur as a result of tangential movements of sharp implements across the skin surface, for example razors, broken glass, knives, swords etc. They are often deeper at their origin, and tend to be more superficial at their termination. They are often aimed at the head or neck with fewer injuries aimed at the upper limb and trunk.

Incised wounds have cleanly divided edges, compared with lacerations, whose edges are crushed and abraded. The wounds may be jagged but are not usually abraded (but see below).

The nature of the wound edges is a direct reflection of the sharpness of the edge/ blade. A blunt cutting edge is more likely to produce wound margins that are slightly abraded or bruised.

There are no tissue bridges within the wound, as the sharp implement cleanly divides all soft tissue structures in its path.

Slash wounds often bleed profusely, as vascular structures are cleanly divided (unlike the crushing of arteries found in lacerations) and spasm is diminished.

The presence of foreign material in the depths of the wound may complicate healing, but is less of a problem than with lacerations. All slash wounds should be thoroughly examined in the emergency department in order to assess potential damage to underlying deeper structures, such as neurovascular bundles.

The origin of a slash wound is often said to be deeper than it’s termination, but this generalisation is often complicated by the relative positions of the parties involved as well as the anatomical location injured. Fights are not static events, and it is often difficult to determine relative positions during an assault, unless it has been reliably witnessed.

The abdomen is often said not to be a favoured target during an assault (Knight 1996) – the main targets being the face, head, neck and chest.

However, recent research by Bleetman et al (2003 (b)) undertaken to determine the favoured targets for slash injuries seemed to indicate that abdominal slash wounds are a favoured site of attack for some groups of assailant (in the case of this research, soldiers trained in close quarters combat).

Eight types of slashing motion were identified with 23% slashing in a single long stroke; 31% a single short stroke, whilst the other research volunteers favoured a combination of long and short slashes. In clinical practice only 11% of victims showed signs of more than one slash stroke.

Emphatic generalisations should not therefore be made regarding the likely causation of a slash wound on a person’s abdomen, in the absence of any corroborative evidence.

Further research ( Bleetman et al 2003 (a)) utilising students identified 2 patterns of slash attack – the ‘chop and drag’ (generating high peak forces and velocities), and the ‘sweeping motion’. This was more common, and it was found that diagonal slashes were favoured (particularly long slashes (averaging 34 cm) from shoulder to waist. Only 18% of subjects favoured a horizontal slash across the body.

The forces generated in slash attacks were found to be peaking at 212 N (with a maximum velocity of just under 15 m/s). This compares with a peak force of 800 N generated in a human stab attack.

Reference:

Bleetman A., Watson C.H., Horsfall I., Champion S.M. (2003 (a)), ‘Wounding patterns and human performance in knife attacks: optimising the protection provided by knife resistant body armour’, Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine 10(4) 243-248

Read more: http://www.forensicmed.co.uk/wounds/sharp-force-trauma/slash-wounds/

Interesting article...

Found this while doing a search on an unrelated topic.  Pretty interesting. Follow the link:
http://www.aware.org/arttruelaw/knifeattack.shtml

LinkedIn debate

Interesting Dialogue from an ILEETA debate on LinkedIN. Can you pick out which gentleman is against knife training…?

DEVIL’S ADVOCATE: THE ANTI-KNIFE TRAINING ARGUMENT…

I am in the process of addressing the Colorado POST board / SEM committee on arrest control to try and get a basic course added to the POST LE academy training. I am interested in feedback / comments / input from other trainers in other States.

Please refer to the link below that will take you to a recent Blog posting......

Tactical Knife Options and.... tacticalknifeoptions.blogspot.com

Devil’s Advocate: The anti-knife training argument… Over the years, and despite the enormous need and desire for knife tactics training, I have heard some interesting myths surrounding knife tactics training for peace officers....

 John Franklin • Since most working street policemen carry some sort of knife on their persons, I think it's time that depts. actually consider some sort of actual training that incorporates offensive knife training along with their annual or semi-annual firearms training. If by some chance an officer is forced to defend himself by using the personal knife he/she carries on his person, they and their agency are likely going to be sued by the offender (should they survive) or the offender's surviving family. One big sticking point in many lawsuits is an alleged failure to train, or train properly. It makes good sense from that point alone for agencies to offer training in offensive knife training for those officers who choose to carry one while performing their duties.

John Weninger • My knife was used as a tool, I would have my pen as a weapon if I had to. Should we train on that too? When It comes to surviving a deadly assault against a suspect officers need to be able to think of all the weapons they could use that they have to survive such an attack. Therefore your training program should include everything to survive a deadly assault. Since you are not able to hypothesis every deadly encounter it is impossible to train to avoid being sued after surviving one of any kind of deadly incident, pistol, rifle or shotgun (whatever); period. Who sues you is not up to you, surviving is.

Peter Kolovos • If you carry a gun. Then you carry your "Weapon Retention Tool" (knife) on your Support side. Period, end of discussion. When it's a life or death struggle for your pistol and you have a knife on you, use it and use it well!

Jeff Black, M.Ed • Thanks all for the input and perspectives. I like the adage "one mind, any weapon". Meaning the proper mindset prepares and operates the body properly. Yes, a pen can be used as a weapon just like a rolled up magazine, hand full of dirt, seat belt, flashlight and so on. But only if the person is dedicated to and prepared mentally to fight, fight hard and win. My major point (at least here in CO) is that unlike the pen or flashlight, the knife is clearly defined in the CRS as a "Deadly Weapon". So if an officer knowingly carries it (just like the other defined deadly weapon: firearm) he/she should probably ahve some training with it. Proper training instills confidence by increasing awareness, ability and skill. I always ask "what would it hurt to train the officer with the knife?". It only gives them an additional deadly force option and increases situational awareness. Thanks again for all the input.

George Williams • Good job, Jeff, on your blog with explaining a lot of the fallacies advanced by the "No need to train" crowd re: duty knives. This is the same reasoning we've been arguing since 1990, when we introduced the only 4th Amendment-based nationwide duty knife training available. We've also distributed a Duty Knife model policy to over 3,000 agencies in N. America. Additionally, I initiated the discussion and design of the Benchmade Knife Company's "Trainer" training drones that perfectly duplicate the feel, weight, throw, and operation of their live counterparts.

Our Duty Knife courses have very high evals from officers because they answer fundamental questions of last-ditch survival as well as their questions about post-incident survival (not going to jail, keeping their job, and not losing their stuff). This course was developed to meet the physical defense needs (good catch, Jeff, and the offense/defense nonsense so many espouse--reasonable force can only be responsive in nature, and therefore is not "offense"), while remaining defensible during the deployment of the knife (hacking, slashing, and inflicting maximum damage will make it less likely to survive the post-incident processes). It's a proven system with 3 saves so far (where the officers each stated that it was "just like training"), and each save was bloodless because the officers followed the training (although in each case, it was reasonable to have stabbed the suspect, the warning as the officer deployed the knife was sufficient to gain compliance). While we have a military course that we teach, a police course should be focused on the reality of the officer, and not employ a knife in the same manner.

If anyone would like a copy of the policy, or more information about this course that has no martial arts techniques or military employment philosophy, is defensible (articulation points and deadly force standards are reinforced both in class and on the floor), let me know. gtwilliams@cuttingedgetraining.org.

Good luck with Colorado POST. Let me know if I can be of any assistance to you--I've been down this road for over a decade. Be safe.

Jeff Black, M.Ed • George: Thank you for the valuable feedback and willingness to share your expereince. I would love a copy of the policy you reference. I have worked with several agencies on policy development and it has arisen in civil court as well. Thanks again. I will send you an e-mail as well. Merry Christmas...

John Weninger • Good forum. George I have one of your knives. It has served me well: The knife needs new screws for the pocket clip and a paint job. I would like to play the devils advocate in the training as a prerequisite to carrying one on duty.

If anyone has been to a street survival class, an advanced pugilistic street survival class or read books, viewed your departments video library then we know that there are many weapons we can use in the last ditch effort.

In a simple fight with a 5150 resisting arrest, this suspect was wearing a backpack, I had one handcuff on the suspect in a right rear arm bar and wrist lock; suspect on their belly. I needed my partner to cut the backpack straps off the suspect to handcuff the other arm and then fit the suspect in the patrol car; empty pockets. My partner did not have knife. So he had to get one of mine. It extended the struggle. This was not a last ditch effort, it was a necessity. I bought that officer a knife that day. That's how strongly I felt the need for on was that day.

A lot of motor officers have one pen that is special, it is not for tickets to be signed with. It is one of their last ditch tools. The tools at hand, the fear of being sued, the complexity of certifying all the hypotheticals is not as necessary as the officer having the proper mind set and being physically prepared.

Law suits are inevitable. Some people wait to see if the officer is criminally negligent as found by the DA after surviving an event. Some people sue immediately via federal court. The weapons do not matter, it is the totality of the circumstances and environment that will carry the weight in the courts decision. Lethal force options, such as using a brick if a suspect has taken your weapon, are we trained to use bricks, we are trained to survive. The question will come up, have you been trained to use a brick? Are you alive to answer the question?

Going to special pugilistic schools should be an option for advanced training credits. Being ready for work is your responsibility and you should invest in yourself. The criminals do. Legislation opens the door for litigation.

Train, get trained but let's not keep a valuable tool off of officers reach when they need it for non-combat issues. Such as rescue or increasing officer safety and suspect injuries as in the above mentioned example with the backpack.

Jeff Black, M.Ed • I completely agree that the officer must have the mind-set, drive and dedication first off. However, from an Expert Witness perspective in LE UOF civil cases, the first thing plaintiffs go after is the officer’s training. Unlike the brick, a knife is designed, manufactured, sold and purchased as a weapon. In the Colorado Revised Statutes it is clearly defined as a deadly weapon. I am not in any way, shape or form suggesting that officers not be allowed to carry a duty knife as a second deadly force option. I strongly advocate for such and believe that having more than one deadly force option is tactically wise.

 I am simply stating that there is a personal and agency responsibility to train with all weapons that you carry. Officers are required to train and be certified with TASERs, OC, Batons, firearms and hand-to-hand. So, why would they not be afforded the opportunity to train with a deadly weapon; the duty knife? What possible harm can be had by developing ability, skill and confidence in a weapon that in Colorado 96% of officers carry every single day?

Mindset first of course…. However, the proper warrior mindset also dictates that you train with all of your weapon systems and develop an intimate familiarity with them prior to carrying them on the street. To do otherwise is foolish and irresponsible. After all doesn’t Dave Grossman proffer “in combat you will not rise to the occasion; you will simply default to your level of training”.

George Williams • I have to concur with Jeff re: the need to train with "weapons." I've been an expert since 1991 all over this country, defending officers against some of the best the plaintiffs' bar has to throw at us in federal and state courts. Allegations of failure to train are SOP in every case. Lt's say we now have an officer intentionally and reasonably injure a suspect with a knife, and we need to defend it.

Now, given the line of reasoning that 99+% of police knife use is for utility, we walk into federal court, stand in front of the jury holding up the knife, and say, "This is a utility tool. It is not a deadly weapon in and of itself. It is not normally used as deadly weapon, and therefore it is a utility tool. Except for this single instance...and a couple of dozen others in the last ten years where it was reasonably used to kill or injure suspects." Plaintiff's attorney will then rise, with a smirk on her face, hold the knife up and say, "Who are they trying to kid? When is a knife not a deadly weapon? If you were to have one of these in your hand, don't you think the officer might shoot you? It is a deadly weapon and the defense is simply attempting to mislead you, as they have this entire trial." To state that a knife is solely a utility tool is ingenuous, and will rightly create the appearance that we are afraid to say, "It's a knife, a deadly weapon that is most often used by police as a utility tool."

I don't believe there should be a policy and training course on everything (I knew a cop who used an overstuffed chair to hold a PCP suspect against a wall until backup arrived, but he never attended and I would never advocate "Overstuffed Chair Training" courses). However, those force tools designated as weapons, as Jeff points out, firearms, Tasers, OC, baton, etc., have policy directives as well as specific training courses. Common objects employed as "emergency measures of defense" will be covered in the officer's articulation of his reasonable perception of need at the time.

 I absolutely agree with you, John, about the mindset of integrating force. We've been teaching integrated force problem-solving for more than 30 years, directly incorporating law and all force options into every skill domain. DT classes include those times officers need to transition to deadly force and shoot the suspect. Firearms includes DT on the live-fire line so officers are not having to invent the wheel when they are physically engaged with a suspect at proximity and need to shoot. We explore expedient weapons as well as environmental weapons (fixed objects), and create the mindset of "If you force me to fight, I will bring the world to the fight."

That mindset must include a deadly weapon such as a knife if an officer is going to carry it. And if any officer in an agency carries it, that agency should ensure there is a policy regarding that force tool as a weapon, and then ensure that officer is trained to employ that weapon like a cop and not "go primitive" or use some martial art or military method of maximum infliction of damage to the suspect. It's an easy fix--the policy is free and the training is 4th Amendment compliant and (we're regularly told) the best training they've ever attended.

 I agree, don't fear the inevitable lawsuit. Fear losing that lawsuit. It's easy to protect against. Create a policy, then train it, follow it, and enforce it. Achieve reasonable conduct in the street because that's what you do. Articulate your reasonable perceptions of the imminent threat so that others can understand what you saw and what you went through.

It's just my opinion, but cops need a policy about their knives, and training in their reasonable employment. Be safe.

John Weninger • Thanks George,

I may go to Specialty Tools here in SB for the screws. Yes, the wear is staying. I bought that knife because of the quality and standards, the handle in particular is superior, which is ribbed for none slip.

In knife training I was wondering too, as in EMT classes, we have to learn the human anatomy. Knives have an anatomy of 200 probable parts if I remember correctly and 400 shapes. Would that be on a POST test? Would we need to know knife identification by anatomy parts and shapes, so that we can articulate that parts of the knife parts we used to strike, stab, block or slash a suspect?

This can be very complex if it is legislated. Being taught pugilistic through course instruction, making flash cards to study, or recordings on your smart phones to watch and listen to are great tools to keep your proper mind set trained.

This can get really technical or practical. Can it be both if it goes to POST?

George Williams • Not really sure why a lot of technical and nomenclature aspects of a knife is necessary in a user's course or an instructor's course. We are not creating "knife experts" for court. We can hire those people if technical aspects of testimony is needed (I twice served as an expert on "knives" where technical issues were a factor in the prosecution--once happened to be for my agency, and once as a professional expert).

Officers need to know when and how to efficiently and reasonably put the pointy end into the suspect, and then how to explain why it was reasonable to put their particular pointy weapon into the suspect at that particular time.

Basic nomenclature beyond that of a layman is really not necessary. Same-same with anatomy. The knife is deadly force if it breaks the skin of the suspect. We discuss and demonstrate the circulatory system of the human body in class, explaining where targets are. This is not a medical class nor intended to be such. There is no more need to articulate human anatomy when employing a knife in defense of life than there is when shooting someone in a defense of life situation. I put bullets in the center of the biggest body part I can find until I find a bigger, better body part to shoot as long as he remains an imminent threat.

There is no need to complicate training--knife or any other training. EMTs need to know anatomy at a lower level than paramedics, who in turn need a lower level than nurse practitioners. Their need is lower than a general practitioner, and so on until you reach an anatomical specialist. Cops need targets on the human body and to know that it is deadly force if they use it.

This only gets complicated when folks begin defending their own brand of martial art or training program. I used to keep up with every make and model handgun in the world, including the S&W model of the week. Now, I couldn't care less. If it has a trigger and a muzzle and an ammo source, I can make it get loud and generally hit where I'm aiming. If I press the trigger and the trigger is hard, my thumb pushes down, and if nothing clicks or moves, it pushes up--and then it gets loud. The brand and caliber are less than mildly interesting.

We need to simplify rather than complicate. We need to do training assessments of what cops actually need on the street at and before the critical moments, and then cut away all that is superfluous. While complication fascinates the human ego, simplicity generally rules the fight. Let's keep training as simple and uncomplicated as possible and teach them what they need to do the job.

John, this isn't directed AT you. I know you're just putting out questions. I have no doubt you are a responsible cop and trainer.

Jeff Black, M.Ed • I agree with George that in-depth nomenclature is not necessary for the lay-officer. I prefer to teach what physical characteristic make for a good tactical folder for duty-carry. Blade configuration, (tip up or tip down), can it be opened single handed under duress, and so on. Most officers I know understand how to field strip their firearm, but do not have the in-depth nomenclature knowledge one gleans through say, an armorers course. Same thing for the in-depth medical and anatomical knowledge. It is better to teach which type of attack (slash V. stab) is going to immediately incapacitate an attacker; Where certain targets are and how to access them rather than a full-fledged medical course. Same as with firearms training. We teach where to shoot to optimize the chances of stopping a threat as opposed to the intricacies of an MD level understanding

Great class today

Enjoyed a great class today with State Parks / DOW. Great group of professionals!

Duty Knife - Offensive Tactics training

On January 25, from 12:00-17:00 hours, The Broomfield Police Department is hosting a Duty Knife - Offensive Tacticscourse that is derived from the POST approved Tactical Knife Options certification course.

This interactive, education based training course will build the officer's skill, ability and confidence with the duty-knife as a second deadly force option. Statistically, 96% of officers in Colorado carry a duty-knife. This course will train them with the duty-knife in threat recognition, prioritizing and controlling.

Students will learn how to select a duty knife for carry, where to carry the knife, how to deploy it, and as a last resort - how to effectively use it.

Course flyer is attached. Please post and share with the troops. If you have any questions or would like further information, don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you.

Cost: $70.00

Force Science #218

I. "Looming": Important consideration when cops fire at moving cars

Skepticism often arises when officers shoot at vehicles they claim were about to run them over. Questions range from "Why didn't the cop just jump out of the way?" to "How come his estimate of the car's speed is so much higher than that of other witnesses at the scene?"

The answers may lie with a perceptional phenomenon called "looming."

This quirk of the mind is now explained in detail in the Force Science certification course and was touched on recently by Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Institute, during a presentation on research findings relevant to law enforcement at the annual conference of the Illinois Homicide Investigators Assn.

Looming, Lewinski told the conference's 500 attendees, is an illusion that occurs when a person (an officer in this context) is standing in the path of an approaching vehicle. Each time the gap between the officer and the oncoming car closes by half, the space occupied by the image of the vehicle in the officer's visual field roughly doubles.

"This exponential enhancement--a seemingly explosive rate of growth--is well documented in scientific literature," says Chris Lawrence, the Force Science instructor who teaches looming in the certification course. An officer-safety faculty member at one of North America's largest police training facilities, Lawrence has measured the effect in his own experiments with camera images.

"Because the vehicle appears to be growing dramatically in size, it may seem to be coming at a faster speed than it actually is," Lawrence explains. "The targeted officer may falsely sense that he or she has no time to leap clear, and start shooting instead. Officers are conditioned in training to resort to their firearm in the face of what appears to be an imminent lethal threat.

"Later when the officer reports that the vehicle was bearing down at an inescapable speed, problems may arise. That's because witnesses who are viewing the vehicle from the side won't experience the looming effect. The car will remain essentially the same size as it crosses their visual field, and they'll tend to judge its speed differently. That discrepancy may make the victim officer appear to be lying to justify his use of deadly force."

Details of how looming works get complicated, but the basic phenomenon is important for investigators to know about, Lewinski says, and to be able to articulate in court and before review boards.

Lawrence reports that he and Lewinski currently are working on the best way to demonstrate the phenomenon to triers of fact. The result, Lawrence says, "should help officers in certain controversial encounters where they've shot at vehicles moving toward them."

The inattentional blindness factor and more...

From Force Science:

Great information on detailing UOF incidents during documentation.  Factors that the general public and media do not factor in.....

http://www.forcescience.org/fsnews/213.html

Team TKO- Spartan Race

All:

If you want to particpate in a fun team challenge, then you are welcome to join up for and run the 2013 Spartan Race at Ft. Carson in the Springs.

I have a team "Team TKO" set up for any TKO students if you would like to run with us.  Here is the link:
https://register.SpartanRace.com/register/groups/join.aspx?event=11635&id=7778853&group=274881&pcode=

We are running on May 04 in the morning. Let me know if you are up ot the challenge...!

HOT NEW AREA OF BRAIN RESEARCH OFFERS HOPE FOR BETTER TRAINING, SHARPER STREET SMARTS

From Force Science:
HOT NEW AREA OF BRAIN RESEARCH OFFERS HOPE FOR BETTER TRAINING, SHARPER STREET SMARTS

http://www.forcesciencenews.com/home/detail.html?serial=25

Grossman articles: Critical Incident Amnesia and Agrression & Violence

I was going through my old files and came across these two gems. In training we have talked about "Perceptional Blindness". This first article gives an in depth overview of numerous factors that contribute to PB. For more, follow the link...

"Critical Incident Amnesia: The Physiological Basis and the Implications of Memory Loss During Extreme Survival Stress Situations" By Lt. Col. Dave Grossman & Bruce K. Siddle

http://www.killology.com/article_amnesia.htm

 The second article explains the psychology of combat, combatives training and much more. A great, concise read.  Follow the link:

“Aggression and Violence:”  By Lt. Col. Dave Grossman

http://www.killology.com/article_agress&viol.htm

 

 

Devil’s Advocate: The anti-knife training argument…

Devil’s Advocate: The anti-knife training argument…

Over the years, and despite the enormous need and desire for knife tactics training, I have heard some interesting myths surrounding knife tactics training for peace officers. Most of the time, the “myths” comes from the person(s) allocating budgets or writing policy. As many of you take the information you gleaned during the Tactical Knife Options class back to your agencies, I thought it would be beneficial for me to share some of the myths I have encountered; and my responses. I do this in hopes of providing you solid, logical responses/counter-points that you can use proactively in your presentations of facts/information to the powers that be.  

I have found that most arguments against knife tactics training boil down to either negative Perception of the knife, or cost to train officers with the knife.

Ø  Myth 1 (perception): We will re-name and refer (in policy) to the knife our officers carry as a “Life Saving Tool”, a “device”, or a “Multi-Purpose Tool”. Or we will limit the size of the knife they carry. If we do either or both of the above, the knife won’t be considered or perceived as a weapon and we will be protected liability wise.

o    Answer: C.R.S. 18-1-901(1)€(II) defines a “knife” as a deadly weapon. It does not differentiate between folding or fixed blade knives. It does not reference overall size or blade length, manufacturer or color. It is simply a Deadly Weapon. (Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 18: Criminal Code, 2012)

o    A knife is the only other tool (in addition to the firearm) that an officer carries on his person that is defined as a “deadly weapon”.

o    If a Criminal was threatening and/or coming at an Officer with that same “Life Saving Device” or a knife with only a 2.5 inch blade, would the officer be justified in shooting him? Yes! Because it is still a deadly threat; i.e. weapon.

Ø  Myth 2 (perception): If an officer is facing a deadly threat, he can “make do” or improvise and use whatever he needs to, to stay alive, including a knife. So we are covered under that umbrella and don’t need specific training.

o    Answer: Then wouldn’t the same hold true for firearms? Why do officers have to pass firearms training in the academy and qualify every year? Would you allow a new officer, first day in FTO, to carry a firearm with absolutely no training or certification? Of course not. We train in order to have consistent, documented training records.

o    Duty to train: If an officer carries a weapon knowing that in the course of his duties, there is a chance (however slight) he may have to use that weapon; he is legally obligated to train with it. The agency, likewise, is obligated to either provide training with that weapon, or the opportunity to train with that weapon.

o    Lack of confidence (in one’s training, ability and/or skill) is the leading cause of excessive use-of-force cases. When an officer’s confidence is low, he tends to panic and over-react. Training increases confidence and morale; improves ability and builds skills. Dave Grossman states: “In a combat (like situation) one does not rise to the occasion. He simply defaults to his level of training”.

o    If an officer shoots someone, there is a very high probability that he and the agency will be sued. Even if it is a completely textbook, legal shoot. The first thing the plaintiff’s attorney attacks is training. If there is no documented (POST approved) training then there is a gaping negligence and opportunity for liability. The high probability for litigation is because it is a high level or deadly force situation. The same would hold true for use of a duty-knife by an officer.

Ø  Myth 3 (cost): We train our officers in basic “knife defense” and that should suffice. There is no need for offensive tactics training.

o    Answer: Do you train officers in Defensive TASER tactics? How about Defensive OC Pepper Spray Tactics? Defensive Baton? No? How about “Matrix” training; where officers are taught how to evade or “slip” a bullet by contorting their bodies? We teach officers how to use these weapons offensively. How to shoot, spray, TASE, and strike. We use offensive tactics to defend ourselves and others. The same should be true for the knife.

o    When someone learns the offensive tactics with any weapon, they become more aware and in tune with how that weapon works, how it is deployed and used. This knowledge then makes them better able to recognize the threat and counter an attack with that weapon.  You HAVE to teach offensive before you teach defensive.

Ø  Myth 4 (cost): It is easier and more cost effective to not allow our officers to carry a knife.

o    Answer: Officers have multiple less-lethal options that they carry, (OC, baton, TASER, arrest control open-hand). They are trained and certified with each one. However, officers carry only two deadly force options on their persons: A Firearm and a Knife.

o    If you take away the knife, you limit them to one deadly force option. What if the officer loses the firearm option? Then they are left to inadequately try to neutralize and control a deadly threat with less than appropriate means. This is simply morally unacceptable and tactically unwise.

§   Officers get dis-armed. (50% of officers shot and killed in Colorado in 2010-2011 were shot with their own weapon).

§   Officer suffers a major malfunction or runs out of ammo.

§   Sometimes it is inappropriate or tactically unwise to shoot (ex: crowds…)

§   Weapons retention. If the officer is fighting for control over his weapon, he can’t shoot at that moment.

o    Is it more cost effective to save money in the short term and not train officers, rolling the dice and hoping a million dollar law suit won’t happen? Or better to spend money now; equip and train officers and prevent law suits from happening in the long term?

I hope this helps. If you have encountered any myths or other arguments against knife tactics training, please share them. You probably are not the only one. Let me know if you have any input, insight, comments or questions. And feel free to share the info.  Good luck!

“Never, ever, ever settle for mediocrity in a business where being average can be fatal”

 

Jeff