"Are we breeding a police culture of “additional victims?”

[redantstyle]

'Looking bad' and being objectively unreasonable are two entirely different things. I didn't about how the video 'looked' I asked if it were police brutality. It was a trick question to determine whether you would go based solely on a knee-jerk emotional response of a snippet of video, or would actually research the totality of the case. There is a legal term......'Totality of the Circumstances'.......and easier word would be 'Context'.

by default, my answer was 'no'.

i then went on to explain what i felt was a major point of perception in regards to 'police brutality'. i was merely making an observation, not a recrimination.

'cept maybe for their jujutsu skills.

i've been picked up on bench warrants for traffic tickets and license violations...behind the wheel of course. my experience with the police has been stellar. i treated them like gentlemen, and was treated the same in return.

i'm not anti-cop, not even close. all i am doing is pointing out a cause/effect sequence as i see it.

regards,

J Michael Barr

 

[jks9199]

Exactly. It seems to be a recurring theme in these sorts of threads that "we" (cops) have blinders on when it comes to this stuff. I dont know how to express the facts of the job when it comes to "officer types" and the dynamics of dealing with them. I have seen many officers terminated for misbehavior...no "thin blue line" here. And I have seen MANY MORE investigated over situations where either the complainant outright lied or had justified force used against them. Of course they are out running their mouths about how we all "close ranks" behind our cops....again that's MY AGENCY. I don't know how anybody elses operates.

I've been the subject of or a prominent name in several Internal Affairs investigations. Been cleared in every citizen complaint, too. I do my job, do it right, and do it within the law. But that doesn't mean that every person I encounter walks away happy to have met me, either. And just because they're not my newest fan doesn't mean I did anything wrong, either...

 

[redantstyle]

Now, we get Monday morning quarter backs telling us they could have done it better.......and perhaps they could.......how many times have you guys wrested a sharp object from a 6'2 250 pound man intent on running you through with it? In short, is your statement on 'Control tactics' based on REAL world experience, or forum room theory and dojo play?

i'll base it on over thirty five years of martial arts practice with copious amounts of nhb sparring, and some real fights even.

i'll stand by my assessment of their restraint skill level. given the position they have him in at the point the video starts, between the two of them, given sufficient training, they should have been able to immobilize him.

but i will draw back a bit and say that i was a bit harsh, as they are cops and not expected to be accomplished martial artists.

and frankly, given the extra info you provided, if he had a weapon, then i feel they took it very easy on him.

and really, you just mistook the tone of my original post.

regards,

J Michael Barr

 

[Archangel M]

And just because something "could have been done better" doesn't make the way it WAS DONE wrong. And I will add (from experience) that dojo training, sparring and civilian fights are vastly different from apprehending someone. From experience I will restate that restraint holds against an active resister just dont work often enough to be trusted in this line of work.

 

[redantstyle]

And just because something "could have been done better" doesn't make the way it WAS DONE wrong.

sure, but there is always 'better' too. my critique is from an ma pov, on an ma board, so...

And I will add (from experience) that dojo training, sparring and civilian fights are vastly different from apprehending someone. From experience I will restate that restraint holds against an active resister just dont work often enough to be trusted in this line of work.

i understand. there really is no such thing as a 'hold'. and because you cant start dropping heads on the ground, or hyperextending joints, it limits your options to things that aren't liable to be effective. without hitting them on top of it.

my only real point here is that hitting is more likely to be viewed as 'brutality'.

take the video with the girl who kicks her shoe off. what really stands out in that are the overhand rights he throws while she is face down on the floor.

i think what is core to this is the violation of the mythical image of police that the average person has. i may be going out on a limb here, but it seems that if you use your 'lineage' weaponry, namely guns, batons, pepper spray, tasers, or gas to disable someone you wont get the same kind of backlash from the public because it's more accepted.

in contrast, it seems uncouth, or uncivilized even, for the police to use their fists.

if that makes any sense.

regards,

J Michael Barr

 

[Archangel M]

i think what is core to this is the violation of the mythical image of police that the average person has. i may be going out on a limb here, but it seems that if you use your 'lineage' weaponry, namely guns, batons, pepper spray, tasers, or gas to disable someone you wont get the same kind of backlash from the public because it's more accepted.

in contrast, it seems uncouth, or uncivilized even, for the police to use their fists.

if that makes any sense.

Yeah. I understand what you are saying and can see how people would view that.

Even with the perception that we have all the gizmos that allow us to arrest people with "minimized force", there are also people out there that would call "brutality" if the officers Tased the guy or started hitting his legs with batons (as was shown in a previous example of "excessive force"). So sometimes it seems like a "no win" situation where anything more than some friendly suggestions to comply will be seen as excessive.

On one hand, as an American I like the fact that my fellow citizens prize their freedom and question authority. On the other hand these same people employ me to "keep the peace" but dont want to really SEE what that job sometimes requires. Everybody wants the cops to "deal with the law breakers" unles THEY are the law breaker if you know what Im saying.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Something I come across in these discussions (it may have even popped up here) is the "cops just expect you do do what they say..." line. Implying that "brutality" stems from officers thinking that they can just tell people what to do and beat them if they refuse.

Well, if you are being arrested...yeah, we do expect you to "do as you are told". If you don't "do what we tell you" you are resisting arrest which is against the law. This isn't an option..you don't have a choice. I will ask you to comply, tell you to comply then make you comply (unless your actions demand me to go directly to MAKE).

It's an immature person who says 'Cops just expect you to do as you are told'.......because that is a person who doesn't realize what police are, which is an extension of society. It's a 17 year old 'Rebel without a clue' mentality.

SOCIETY expects you to obey the laws, and have charged the police with ensuring that you do so.....and they have granted them the force of law, and the authority to use whatever force is necessary to gain compliance.

Now, if the laws were unjust, some folks would have an argument. But laws against not robbing our neighbors, not stealing, not raping, not driving so drunk you can kill other people......those are not unjust laws. And if we accept that the laws are not unjust, then we have to accept that those who REFUSE to obey those laws are the ones in the wrong, and have NO RIGHT to resist arrest when confronted by the lawful authority.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Accusing "The Police" of overlooking brutality is implying that we have some sort of national police force. I cant answer for what a PD half the nation away does. And expecting me to bear some sort of responsibility for the actions of some cops I have no association with (or influence the way their PD handles them) is unfair. Police service is "locally served" if your local dept has "issues then do something about it.

Most people enjoy complaining and pointing fingers rather than acting. If I had a nickle for every "those dirty cops did this to me..." story where the teller did zippo about it..well Id be on a beach somewhere.

This isnt aimed at the last poster. I tend to generalize on these topics vs pointing fingers at individuals.

Excellent point! Local police forces tend to take on the views of the local political authorities, which are, in turn, a reflection of the local community.

 

[sgtmac_46]

How would you suggest people act on this issue? I'm asking honestly.

It also seems like much of what you are complaining about it terms of use of force comes from pressure from the public. Which seems to contradict what you said about acting on it. You think people should act when they see a problem, but seem frustrated when they do.

Here's the problem......when a doctor is alleged to have screwed up, he is judged by a medical board that is made up of experts in the field he is alleged to have screwed up in.

When a lawyer is alleged to have screwed up, he is judged by a board of lawyers who are likewise experts.

When a pilot is alleged to have made a mistake, the NTSB has a board of experts that review the facts.

But when a police officer is alleged to have screwed up, many folks want him judged by the opinion of laymen with ZERO experience or understanding of the dynamics involved.

Is the public right to point to a possible problem? Yes, but the public also needs to be open minded enough to realize that Starsky and Hutch didn't prepare them to judge the objective reasonableness of a use of force, devoid of any facts but a 30 second video.

Use of force is ugly......but, then, so is surgery. But we have surgery shows on television, so everyone knows surgery when they see it. Violence, as prolific as media violence is, is sanitized and distorted.

Real violence looks very little like the violence T.J. Hooker used to subdue the bad guy.

 

[sgtmac_46]

cant imagine why you are directing this towards me.

jarrod said he got an anonymous neg rep.

and for the record, if i thought it was you (how in the hell would i know?), then i would call you out directly.

since everyone is being so open...

regards,

J Michael Barr

Fair enough......my apologies for the misunderstanding.

 

[sgtmac_46]

by default, my answer was 'no'.

i then went on to explain what i felt was a major point of perception in regards to 'police brutality'. i was merely making an observation, not a recrimination.

'cept maybe for their jujutsu skills.

i've been picked up on bench warrants for traffic tickets and license violations...behind the wheel of course. my experience with the police has been stellar. i treated them like gentlemen, and was treated the same in return.

i'm not anti-cop, not even close. all i am doing is pointing out a cause/effect sequence as i see it.

regards,

J Michael Barr

True, but you'll notice that even excellent 'jujutsu skills' sometimes deteriorate in to the 'Ground and Pound' even among so called submission experts.

I agree that striking looks bad, and I tell my officers that. If they can use an arm bar or even a strangle over a strike, it'll look better to the public.

But at the end of the day, when a man is trying to stab you with a pen, you really have to do what you have to do.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I've been the subject of or a prominent name in several Internal Affairs investigations. Been cleared in every citizen complaint, too. I do my job, do it right, and do it within the law. But that doesn't mean that every person I encounter walks away happy to have met me, either. And just because they're not my newest fan doesn't mean I did anything wrong, either...

If every person you dealt with walked away happy with you......you wouldn't be doing your job.

 

[sgtmac_46]

i'll base it on over thirty five years of martial arts practice with copious amounts of nhb sparring, and some real fights even.

i'll stand by my assessment of their restraint skill level. given the position they have him in at the point the video starts, between the two of them, given sufficient training, they should have been able to immobilize him.

but i will draw back a bit and say that i was a bit harsh, as they are cops and not expected to be accomplished martial artists.

and frankly, given the extra info you provided, if he had a weapon, then i feel they took it very easy on him.

and really, you just mistook the tone of my original post.

regards,

J Michael Barr

I apologize if I mistook your tone. Further, my retort was a bit sharper than I intended.

As to the point of submission skills, you are correct......most police officers are not world-class submission artists......further, even world-class submission experts, when fighting MMA and Vale Tudo, often find themselves in a position where find themselves needing to resort to using 'Ground and Pound' techniques.

 

[sgtmac_46]

And just because something "could have been done better" doesn't make the way it WAS DONE wrong. And I will add (from experience) that dojo training, sparring and civilian fights are vastly different from apprehending someone. From experience I will restate that restraint holds against an active resister just dont work often enough to be trusted in this line of work.

No, we have to apply the 'Objective Reasonableness' standard......not the 'If I had 2 weeks to study the video of the exact scenario, I could come up with a fool-proof way of responding' standard.

We take a snippet of a violent, dynamic and chaotic situation, broadcast it, watch it dozens of times, and then conclude that we could have done better, somehow.

The same folks who Monday morning quarter back such situations should consider this......what if, on their job, they had a video camera watching them at a truly chaotic crisis point, and then hundreds of thousands of folks, many of whom are already hostile toward them based solely on what they do for a living, get to give their critique of how they failed.

Now, some folks will say 'Police work isn't like other jobs......if you don't want the scrutiny, don't take the job....' and that's a fair assessment on many levels.......law enforcement does NEED a level of scrutiny above many other jobs in a free society........but if folks are going to take upon themselves the task of judging the actions of others, they BY RIGHTS need to truly educate themselves on those actions.

 

[sgtmac_46]

sure, but there is always 'better' too. my critique is from an ma pov, on an ma board, so...



i understand. there really is no such thing as a 'hold'. and because you cant start dropping heads on the ground, or hyperextending joints, it limits your options to things that aren't liable to be effective. without hitting them on top of it.

my only real point here is that hitting is more likely to be viewed as 'brutality'.

take the video with the girl who kicks her shoe off. what really stands out in that are the overhand rights he throws while she is face down on the floor.

i think what is core to this is the violation of the mythical image of police that the average person has. i may be going out on a limb here, but it seems that if you use your 'lineage' weaponry, namely guns, batons, pepper spray, tasers, or gas to disable someone you wont get the same kind of backlash from the public because it's more accepted.

in contrast, it seems uncouth, or uncivilized even, for the police to use their fists.

if that makes any sense.

regards,

J Michael Barr

I agree with your points, and I make them myself in training. But also stress to officers that they MUST NOT put themselves or others in harms way simply to avoid 'appearing' a certain way.

If two techniques will both get the job done equally, and one is more provocative, choose the less provocative one. But if two techniques might get the job done, but the less provocative one is MORE likely to backfire and get you or someone else hurt, BE PROVOCATIVE!

It's sometimes a damned uncivilized and uncouth job.......or, more specifically, how does one subdue a blood, wacked out, PCP addled rock troll, and still appear couth and civilized? It sometimes gets really ugly.......but, then, most people can't watch open heart surgery, either.

How do you make this look pretty? http://media.putfile.com/copshot

It's a violent, brutal, primal struggle for survival, that ends up with one person bleeding and dead.

 

[Archangel M]

Fortunately it was the right person bleeding and dead in this case.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Fortunately it was the right person bleeding and dead in this case.

EXACTLY! And I point out Trooper Cress as a guy who was doing it right, he had the will to survive, and he'd obviously physically prepared for such an encounter as his balance was fairly decent when he was riding the thug in question, and staying on top.

But even with the text book 'doing it right'.....it's an ugly thing shooting an armed man in the back of the head......right, necessary and justified.......but viscerally ugly none-the-less.

 

[jks9199]

Yeah. I understand what you are saying and can see how people would view that.

Even with the perception that we have all the gizmos that allow us to arrest people with "minimized force", there are also people out there that would call "brutality" if the officers Tased the guy or started hitting his legs with batons (as was shown in a previous example of "excessive force"). So sometimes it seems like a "no win" situation where anything more than some friendly suggestions to comply will be seen as excessive.

On one hand, as an American I like the fact that my fellow citizens prize their freedom and question authority. On the other hand these same people employ me to "keep the peace" but dont want to really SEE what that job sometimes requires. Everybody wants the cops to "deal with the law breakers" unles THEY are the law breaker if you know what Im saying.

The bottom line is that the bad guy needs to end up in cuffs, transported to the jail. All of the various force options are simply a tool to achieve that goal -- and none of them can eliminate the need to put the cuffs on the bad guy. (All right; a gun can, in one sense. If he's dead -- then he's not going to jail.) So barring something like mind control gun that makes the bad guy walk where we want him to -- we're never not going to have to go hands on at some point in the process.

As martial artists, we often have idealized views of what happens in fights. The general public does, too, thanks to TV and movies. Walker takes the bad guys out with a flashy series of kicks and they go down... Batman goes at the bad guy like a Cuisanart on "mince to oblivion" but nobody gets badly hurt... Boxing movies like the Rocky series and Million Dollar Baby and Raging Bull are some of the most realistic fight scenes; they ain't pretty! When was the last time a sparring match looked "pretty?" Way too often, you don't even have a clue about the styles by what two fighters are doing in the ring!

It's even worse in the real world; remember the effects of adrenaline and the stress of a fight. Lots of those wonderful techniques that work great in the training hall just plain go out of the mind under that pressure. Others rely on fine motor control that has vanished. Real use of force, even in ideal situations, is just plain ugly.

 

[sgtmac_46]

The bottom line is that the bad guy needs to end up in cuffs, transported to the jail. All of the various force options are simply a tool to achieve that goal -- and none of them can eliminate the need to put the cuffs on the bad guy. (All right; a gun can, in one sense. If he's dead -- then he's not going to jail.) So barring something like mind control gun that makes the bad guy walk where we want him to -- we're never not going to have to go hands on at some point in the process.

As martial artists, we often have idealized views of what happens in fights. The general public does, too, thanks to TV and movies. Walker takes the bad guys out with a flashy series of kicks and they go down... Batman goes at the bad guy like a Cuisanart on "mince to oblivion" but nobody gets badly hurt... Boxing movies like the Rocky series and Million Dollar Baby and Raging Bull are some of the most realistic fight scenes; they ain't pretty! When was the last time a sparring match looked "pretty?" Way too often, you don't even have a clue about the styles by what two fighters are doing in the ring!

It's even worse in the real world; remember the effects of adrenaline and the stress of a fight. Lots of those wonderful techniques that work great in the training hall just plain go out of the mind under that pressure. Others rely on fine motor control that has vanished. Real use of force, even in ideal situations, is just plain ugly.

Excellent, excellent points.

By the way, speaking of Hollywoodized violence, did you happen to see the movie 'Eastern Promise' with Viggo Mortensen? The Turkish bath fight scene was a pretty good example of avoiding the flashy to get to the more realistic (as realistic as play acting can appear) ugly violence.

 

[Hudson69]

My agency hadn't lost an officer in 20 years when suddenly we lost two in under a year; it was rough. The first officer died due to inexperience or overconfidence but tragic none the less. The second died to the inexperience of another officer who is no longer on the department by choice, for that reason but in any event because of the sacrifices of these two fine officers we have been actively addressing that "I will be sued mind-set."

The academy, we have our own, still covers liability but it is relegated to a small portion of each class that has a high liability factor (guns, tasers, DT and so on) because we dont want anyone going into a situation where a gun should be out but "we dont want to get complained on because we pointed a gun at somebody with a felony warrant for assault."

We also do not want someone to rely to heavily on a taser because it is so much safer than going hands on; there is a time and a place for DT/Arrest Control and there is a time for the taser, not always the same time.

I know that we are members of a modern society but we are the warriors of that modern society and we need to be able to protect our citizens from the predators Corrupting our confidence(s) and putting too much worry in our hearts will only lead to more officers getting hurt or quitting because we are mired in the thoughts of "potential litigation."