# Should Handcuffing and Pressure Points be considered a part of Defensive Tactics?



## Hudson69 (Apr 6, 2011)

Should Handcuffing and Pressure Points be considered a part of Defensive Tactics or taught as separate skill sets? 

Before I left my old agency the emphasis on DT was being taught to "fight." This included but wasn't limited to mental attitude, striking skills, ground fighting basics, working combinations and fitness.  Handcuffing and pressure point application was kind of set apart and not listed as being part of defensive tactics; similar to baton/PR-24 training.  It was taught that "You should not be handcuffing in a fight" and "The only pressure points used in a fight are those that can be done at striking speed with striking power." Handcuffing was used when DT wasn't necessary or after the fight was over.  Pressure point usage was hands on but not primarily a defensive technique. 

I am the lead PPCT Instructor at my new agency.  I will be doing something similar here but bouncing everything I do off of my Instructor Trainer to ensure that we are meeting the requirements of PPCT.  I have taught one class so far and it went well, other than my consistently calling one technique something else...


----------



## jks9199 (Apr 6, 2011)

Where else would you toss 'em?  

Pressure points are definitely part of DT.  They have legitimate applications and uses, and you need to put the whole package together.  Recruits (especially) and in-service need to be taught effective, dominating fighting -- but also tactics and tools that span the force spectrum.  

Cuffing is part of that, too... because once you get the bad guy under control -- whether they compliantly submit, yield to a pressure point or other control method, are knocked out, or shot... you have to cuff them to finally restrain and control them.


----------



## Indie12 (Apr 6, 2011)

Hudson69 said:


> Should Handcuffing and Pressure Points be considered a part of Defensive Tactics or taught as separate skill sets?
> 
> Before I left my old agency the emphasis on DT was being taught to "fight." This included but wasn't limited to mental attitude, striking skills, ground fighting basics, working combinations and fitness. Handcuffing and pressure point application was kind of set apart and not listed as being part of defensive tactics; similar to baton/PR-24 training. It was taught that "You should not be handcuffing in a fight" and "The only pressure points used in a fight are those that can be done at striking speed with striking power." Handcuffing was used when DT wasn't necessary or after the fight was over. Pressure point usage was hands on but not primarily a defensive technique.
> 
> I am the lead PPCT Instructor at my new agency. I will be doing something similar here but bouncing everything I do off of my Instructor Trainer to ensure that we are meeting the requirements of PPCT. I have taught one class so far and it went well, other than my consistently calling one technique something else...


 
Are we talking pressure points to gain control for cuffing, or pressure points to gain control while cuffing?

I'm gonna take a different approach and respond with: "They should be taught as seperate skill sets at first." That is if your talking about teaching the skills and not combining them as one skill set.

Handcuffing an individual obviously (in most cases) require control of the individual, however this can be accomplished by simple control of the individual, rather then pain compliance.

Pressure Points- Bare in mind that in many high strung individuals under the influence or pain resistent, pain compliance (Pressure Points) may not work. Also pressure points on certain individuals aren't always effective. Due to that reason mainly!

I agree with jks9199 Pressure Points and Handcuffing are legitimate parts of Defensive Tactics, plus handcuffing does require control and dominance over the individual. Long as it's within the Departments and Legal 'Use of Force' protocals.


----------



## Bikewr (Apr 27, 2011)

I took the PPCT instructor's course a long time ago (maybe 20 years) and it was all included.

I don't really see any need to separate these from the core training... If handcuffing goes bad the fight is on....   If pressure point techniques don't dislodge your guy then you're going to have to escalate....

Now, there is the thought that "defensive tactics" such as the PPCT system could well be supplemented with "last ditch fighting" techniques in which no holds are barred and all stops are out...Should things go South.
Not a bad idea IMO; Quite a lot of folks do not have any idea how to seriously hurt someone without a weapon.


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 28, 2011)

Hudson69 said:


> Should Handcuffing and Pressure Points be considered a part of Defensive Tactics or taught as separate skill sets?
> 
> Before I left my old agency the emphasis on DT was being taught to "fight." This included but wasn't limited to mental attitude, striking skills, ground fighting basics, working combinations and fitness. Handcuffing and pressure point application was kind of set apart and not listed as being part of defensive tactics; similar to baton/PR-24 training. It was taught that *"You should not be handcuffing in a fight"* and *"The only pressure points used in a fight are those that can be done at striking speed with striking power."* Handcuffing was used when DT wasn't necessary or after the fight was over. Pressure point usage was hands on but not primarily a defensive technique.
> 
> I am the lead PPCT Instructor at my new agency. I will be doing something similar here but bouncing everything I do off of my Instructor Trainer to ensure that we are meeting the requirements of PPCT. I have taught one class so far and it went well, other than my consistently calling one technique something else...


 
Both of the bolded statements are what is taught in PPCT as well. Understanding their use of most pressure points it is done on a person who is not actively resisting or trying to hurt you. They are meant to gain compliance quickly through pain when someone is not verbally compliant or when they just go limp (for example). If the person is actively trying to get away from you, then you should be using the appropriate techniques of knee strikes to loosen them up followed by a takedown immediately. Only when you have physical control of the subject do you attempt handcuffing.

The speed cuffing taught in PPCT is alright. The way it was taught to me as an instructor, was that it taught control principles and tactical approach to people who might not be used to that so they can start to ingrain that habit. Eventually, you will apply those same principles to anytime you cuff somebody.

They need to be taught altogether as one skill set and move between the ranges.  Most assaults occur during the cuffing process, so teaching officers how to do that quickly and safely reduces many of incidents that may escalate higher.  Then you need to know what to do if the initial cuffing goes bad and to regain immediate control so you can regain the ability to handcuff when it is appropriate (safe).

As to the pressure points in a fight.  I agree, I have seen more officers hurt because the suspect has escalated their use of force and the officer is still trying to respond with pushing a pressure point instead of using the strikes that are taught.  For example, what is the secondary target for the straight punch and the heel palm?  As taught, it should be the suspects face.  But, how many agencies actually train and teach that because they are afraid of a lawsuit?  There is a time and place for everything, and it needs to be taught as to the how and when you use each tool.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 29, 2011)

We use a combination of;

Tony Blauer's S.P.E.A.R. (SPontaneous Enabling Accelerated Response)
Ken Good's P.C.R. (Physical Conflict Resolution)
Peter Boatman's Edged Weapon Defense
Tony Lambria (and to a certain extent Royce Gracie) Ground Defense
ISI Israeli Instinctive Shooting
Each of these instructors has taught at S.E.P.S.I. at the Allstate Center (St. Petersburg College) where I'm an adjunct instructor.  Our in-service D.T. is a combination or blending of these principles.  It has been very successful.  Pressure points is still covered in Academy recruit training but is rarely seen during in-service training.  In fact, I can't remember the last time we trained, or I taught it for in-service classes.  When it is covered,it is usually for passive resistance levels.  

Handcuffing on the other hand is still covered for both Academy and in-service D.T. classes.  And for good reason!  Although we don't cuff an actively resisting bad guy, it helps to know what to do if Mr. Compliant becomes Mr. Idiot while the cuffs are going on.  And we all know it isn't uncommon once they hear the first one 'click'.  

We use what is called the 'iron palm takedown'.  At least that is what we use to call it, it probably has a 'PC' label nowadays.  :wink2:


----------



## Buka (Jun 29, 2011)

Hi, all. New forum member here. Been lurking for a while.

I don't think they should be part of DT.  Because the suits are only going to give so much time per year for DT, as well as for cuffing, as well as for &#8220;whatever&#8221;.

If you include them all together in one program, they will not allot more time for training, they will reduce it as a cost saving measure. Oh, sure, they'll TELL you they will give you more, and their intentions might very well be honorable, but it ain't gonna happen in this lifetime.

It's a game. One that you, as a DT instructor, must learn to play at a high level. DT is looked at as a liability by a department. Most would think that too little DT would be the liability, but that is not the case. And we all know how frustrating it is to teach DT. Academy kids are one thing, they're young, mostly in shape, and all piss and vinegar. In service gives you the craziest mix of physical shape, attitude and abilities you'll find anywhere.
I think the best we can do is learn to play the game well and seek any little bit of an advantage for more training time that we can possibly come up with.

Stay safe, my brothers.


----------



## Balrog (Jun 30, 2011)

Hudson69 said:


> Should Handcuffing and Pressure Points be considered a part of Defensive Tactics or taught as separate skill sets?
> 
> Before I left my old agency the emphasis on DT was being taught to "fight." This included but wasn't limited to mental attitude, striking skills, ground fighting basics, working combinations and fitness. Handcuffing and pressure point application was kind of set apart and not listed as being part of defensive tactics; similar to baton/PR-24 training. It was taught that "You should not be handcuffing in a fight" and "The only pressure points used in a fight are those that can be done at striking speed with striking power." Handcuffing was used when DT wasn't necessary or after the fight was over. Pressure point usage was hands on but not primarily a defensive technique.
> 
> I am the lead PPCT Instructor at my new agency. I will be doing something similar here but bouncing everything I do off of my Instructor Trainer to ensure that we are meeting the requirements of PPCT. I have taught one class so far and it went well, other than my consistently calling one technique something else...


Absolutely they are part of DT.

You have to do something with the person after you....shall we say de-motivate him.  And pressure points are a great way to help with that de-motivation.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 5, 2011)

My street experience has demonstrated to me that pressure points tend to escalate violence at least as often as it demotivates it......in other words, those who are drunk, high on drugs, or otherwise experiencing a mind/body disconnect, tend to respond to pressure points with aggression, if they respond at all......

But Pressure points work GREAT on cops during training! 

Which isn't to say that Pressure Points are worthless, they work well as an opening to another technique, such as pushing the head back by manipulating the orbital in order to effect a leveraged takedown.......but as an end unto themselves, they are overrated and deficient.


----------



## Buka (Jul 5, 2011)

sgtmac_46 said:


> My street experience has demonstrated to me that pressure points tend to escalate violence at least as often as it demotivates it......in other words, those who are drunk, high on drugs, or otherwise experiencing a mind/body disconnect, tend to respond to pressure points with aggression, if they respond at all......
> 
> But Pressure points work GREAT on cops during training!
> 
> Which isn't to say that Pressure Points are worthless, they work well as an opening to another technique, such as pushing the head back by manipulating the orbital in order to effect a leveraged takedown.......but as an end unto themselves, they are overrated and deficient.



Lol. Well said. Thanks, that made my day.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jul 5, 2011)

I never thought of pressure points so much for control by themselves, but rather as a means of forcing a movement in a direction needed to allow a technique to be completed and a lock or takedown to be completed.  If your pressure point isn't going to allow complete control, it should only be leading to something else that does.  They are useful to dislodge an assailant's grip or as a distraction most of the time.  There are some exceptions of course, but for LEO, I think that is the most effective use.  

So training for how to dislodge a grip or hold, whether off or on the ground, yes they are good training.  As pain compliance, again, useful if they allow complete control, but always be aware, as mentioned above, that they may not work on all people all the time.


----------



## OKenpo942 (Jul 5, 2011)

Not much that I can add that has not already been covered, but I believe that it is absolutely part of DT and should be included, especially at the cadet/trainee level where there is more time alloted for such things. 

With less time, such as for in-service training, other techniques and topics should be concentrated on such as weapons retention, cuffing, and basic striking and ground techniques.

Bottom line is, all of this should be a lead in to handcuffing as this should be our end goal after survival.

James


----------

