"Every cop should learn BJj" Do you agree?

Well, if you want to turn this into a fantasy, ok.

And here is the luddite issue.

10-15 years ago, it was fantasy to have a fully functioning powerful computer in the palm of your hand on which you could watch TV in town using wireless data (and not analogue broadcast).

50 years ago automatic doors were fantasy outside of the starship enterprise (and those were operated by people in the walls).

A radiogram with pictures? Fantasy.

Lamps you don't fill with gas? That'll never happen.

At one time, it was fantasy to think you could have a carriage not propelled by horses.

Soaring with the birds? Fantasy mate, people can't fly.


Everything is fantasy until you can buy it in a supermarket.
 
I think that's what he was going for. He was attempting to flatten him out, but unfortunately the guy was laying on his side with his arms stretched out which made reaching for the wrist tough.

He had the wrist but let it go to try and transition around to his head(thats where he really screwed up. He was ok.....control of the wrist, elbow up and bent at 90 degree downward....he just needed to put his arm on the back of the upper arm step over and use the arm bar to roll him prone....then transistion into the standard shoulder lock for handcuffing.

From that position he could have utilized the BJJ modified mount that would have controlled the guy without the cop having to do much of anything.

Most DT systems teach pretty similar tactic using a shoulder lock that allows you to controll the guy, free up you hands to get your cuffs, and puts you in good position to handcuff him......but he did not stick to that and lost control when he moved around to the guys head.

From the modified you got multiple submissions you can do that would have taken that guy out without socking him or shooting him.

You don't need multiple submissions....that does you no good. You need control of him in a position that allows you to access your handcuffs and handcuff him.

Hammer fists? Not necessary.

Very much disagree. A couple of hammer fists in that position will often times make them turn away from the strikes which helps you roll them to the prone position for control and handcuffing. The violator is actively resisting him which per allows the officer to use strikes against him.
 
And here is the luddite issue.

There's nothing in my post that qualifies as being a luddite. I addressed both the reality and the fantasy. I don't doubt you can improve biometrics. I also think you're as likely to develop telekinesis as a biometric system people will willingly trust with their lives.
 
He had the wrist but let it go to try and transition around to his head(thats where he really screwed up. He was ok.....control of the wrist, elbow up and bent at 90 degree downward....he just needed to put his arm on the back of the upper arm step over and use the arm bar to roll him prone....then transistion into the standard shoulder lock for handcuffing.

Here's the problem, while I don't see where he had wrist control that doesn't matter because he didn't control the body. Wrist control means diddly squat if you don't control the body, or have a dominant position. Modified mount would have given him positional dominance where he could have more easily controlled his limbs.

Most DT systems teach pretty similar tactic using a shoulder lock that allows you to controll the guy, free up you hands to get your cuffs, and puts you in good position to handcuff him......but he did not stick to that and lost control when he moved around to the guys head.

I think we both agree that once he shifted to attempt to control the head, he was screwed.

You don't need multiple submissions....that does you no good. You need control of him in a position that allows you to access your handcuffs and handcuff him.

When I said multiple submissions, I'm talking about having multiple options because you have positional dominance. Even if he rolls to his stomach or his back, you can maintain that positional dominance and do essentially whatever you want.

Very much disagree. A couple of hammer fists in that position will often times make them turn away from the strikes which helps you roll them to the prone position for control and handcuffing. The violator is actively resisting him which per allows the officer to use strikes against him.

It also escalates the violence and lends itself to potential legal issues down the road. You don't need to use strikes to force someone to move the way you want them to move.
 
There's nothing in my post that qualifies as being a luddite. I addressed both the reality and the fantasy.

But the way you addressed it was resisting change due to mistrust.

Maybe our dictionaries are different, but that's essentially one of the definitions of luddite in mine.

I'm not using it as an insult, or a derogatory term - just a statement.

I don't doubt you can improve biometrics. I also think you're as likely to develop telekinesis as a biometric system people will willingly trust with their lives.

We'll have to disagree on the second part.

Initially, you'll have mass rejection.

Within a few years it'll just be normal.

You'll always get people who "wish for the old way", but their numbers will inevitably decline due to attrition and conversion.

The same was said about trains you know - that they'd never be popular, nobody would trust them, if you travel at more than 20mph your eyes will burst out of the back of your head, etc.

I have absolutely no doubt it'll happen - maybe you'll convert, maybe you'll stick with your current thinking.
 
It also escalates the violence and lends itself to potential legal issues down the road. You don't need to use strikes to force someone to move the way you want them to move.
Sometimes violence is needed. The firefighter escalated the violence when he assaulted a taxi driver. The problem here was the officer wasn't prepared for the violence. He was off duty working a little OT at a cushy hotel just trying to earn some extra cash not actually expecting to have to do work and wasn't prepared for what happened. I think had he been on duty and had the same mindset of being an on-duty officer at the time it would have ended differently. Kansas City is a rough town so I assume this wasn't his first fight as a cop. I also read about this in another article that he was told the guy was a firefighter so I assume the officer lowered his guard, even more, thinking well we are all on the same team he's just drunk.
In my opinion, had he been mentally prepared for work and mentally prepared for battle he would have come at the guy stronger and ended it faster and harder and both would have gone home fine other than a few bumps and bruises on the fireman. If you look at he video in the middle of the fight the cop even stops and starts talking to the wife instead of taking care of business because he wasn't ready for what happened
 
Sometimes violence is needed. The firefighter escalated the violence when he assaulted a taxi driver. The problem here was the officer wasn't prepared for the violence. He was off duty working a little OT at a cushy hotel just trying to earn some extra cash not actually expecting to have to do work and wasn't prepared for what happened. I think had he been on duty and had the same mindset of being an on-duty officer at the time it would have ended differently. Kansas City is a rough town so I assume this wasn't his first fight as a cop. I also read about this in another article that he was told the guy was a firefighter so I assume the officer lowered his guard, even more, thinking well we are all on the same team he's just drunk.
In my opinion, had he been mentally prepared for work and mentally prepared for battle he would have come at the guy stronger and ended it faster and harder and both would have gone home fine other than a few bumps and bruises on the fireman. If you look at he video in the middle of the fight the cop even stops and starts talking to the wife instead of taking care of business because he wasn't ready for what happened

I certainly agree that violence is sometimes needed. I also agree that the officer was justified in using deadly force in this situation. However, I disagree that you need to start bashing a man's head in when a relatively simple level of control is all that's needed.
 
I certainly agree that violence is sometimes needed. I also agree that the officer was justified in using deadly force in this situation. However, I disagree that you need to start bashing a man's head in when a relatively simple level of control is all that's needed.
Of course, Im not saying bash his head in. But a few well-placed strikes may have been the motivation needed for the guy to stop resisting. But honestly, at this point, we are just armchair quarterbacking because its over.
 
I don’t know wrestling, but here’s my take based on what exposure I have to BJJ and Judo.

If Judo is taught with a focus toward immediate effectiveness (rather than quickest competitiveness), a couple of throws, takedown defense, and a bit of ground work can be learned to usefulness in a few months (with other learning also occurring for longer-term development).

If the same approach is taken in BJJ, a couple of takedowns, two mount escapes, basic side control and a simple guard pass can also be trained to usefulness in a few months.

I’d give an edge to BJJ in what can be trained quickly to usefulness in that time.
Off the bat, wrestling will teach a few takedowns/throws, sprawling, a few reversals and escapes, and a few pinning combinations.

Learning them is easy. Actually using them and not getting beat while trying is the tricky part. Those handful of moves you learn your first few months (more like your first 2 months) could be about 90% of what you’ll always use.
 
Here's the problem, while I don't see where he had wrist control that doesn't matter because he didn't control the body. Wrist control means diddly squat if you don't control the body, or have a dominant position. Modified mount would have given him positional dominance where he could have more easily controlled his limbs.

I think we are thinking close to the same thing.

He had the wrist he only needed to step over to get in a dominant position to use arm bar to force him over into his stomach. From there he can easily transistion to the shoulder lock used for handcuffing

It also escalates the violence and lends itself to potential legal issues down the road. You don't need to use strikes to force someone to move the way you want them to move

It already escalated to active resistance. You don’t take chances. You end it as quickly as possible. Better a few strikes to the head and get control than lose control.
 
I think we are thinking close to the same thing.

He had the wrist he only needed to step over to get in a dominant position to use arm bar to force him over into his stomach. From there he can easily transistion to the shoulder lock used for handcuffing

I do think we're thinking along the same lines. I think my main point of contention is trying to control the entire body via a wrist grab. Especially when that person is bigger and stronger than you are.

It already escalated to active resistance. You don’t take chances. You end it as quickly as possible. Better a few strikes to the head and get control than lose control.

I was talking about restraining someone and then hitting them in the head with hammer strikes. That's not a good look and you can accomplish the same goal without strikes. Obviously once the cop got flipped over and started getting his face turned into hamburger all bets were off.
 
He actually didn't need BJJ.

He was in position. He just needed to maintain grip on the left wrist, step over his body and put weight on the back of the upper arm and he would have been in position to have the shoulder lock for handcuffing from the prone position.

Instead he let go of his wrist and moved around to his head while dropping to his knees.



Maybe a few hammer fists to the ear for good measure as well.

That arm bar doesn't exactly work great. That is why BJJ cop uses the knee ride. I used the hammer lock. But I have always found that a really hard way to roll a guy.
 
I think that's what he was going for. He was attempting to flatten him out, but unfortunately the guy was laying on his side with his arms stretched out which made reaching for the wrist tough. From that position he could have utilized the BJJ modified mount that would have controlled the guy without the cop having to do much of anything. From the modified you got multiple submissions you can do that would have taken that guy out without socking him or shooting him.

Hammer fists? Not necessary.

That is pretty much when you see a cop putting the boot in. They have generally run out of options and trying to get an arm.

Anyway kimouras. But you have to be good.

 
I’d attribute that to the previous experience. I’ve had a few guys come from MMA. They did quite well initially, compared to first year guys without any experience (football players included).

They all got to a point where the MMA experience didn’t carry them much further. Just like my wrestling friends who started BJJ - they were well ahead of BJJ white belts who started at the same time, but hit that preverbial wall when going up against higher blue belts and up. They had to unlearn some ingrained habits, like falling to your stomach rather than your back, and not locking their hands unless they were on their feet or had a pinning combination.

You would probably learn a double leg, single leg and knee knock to a functional level more quickly than just about any other throw.

Which means you could be wrestling people on to their back more quickly than just about any other art.

But to face a legit wrestler is a different prospect. And yes I have seen them toy with legit MMAers.

 
That arm bar doesn't exactly work great. That is why BJJ cop uses the knee ride. I used the hammer lock. But I have always found that a really hard way to roll a guy.

Agree on the arm bar except the guy is already on the ground on his side with his elbow bent 90 degrees with hand down below the elbow. It’s right there to be taken easy.

I prefer the hammer lock as well and what I prefer from a standing position.
 
When its all said and done it comes down to Don't get raging drunk on your wedding celebration and assault cab drivers but if you do and the police show up don't hit them either. It generally doesn't work out well for you one way or another.
 
Agree on the arm bar except the guy is already on the ground on his side with his elbow bent 90 degrees with hand down below the elbow. It’s right there to be taken easy.

I prefer the hammer lock as well and what I prefer from a standing position.

So I had another look.

Well so was the kimoura and the hammer lock. And they are both mechanically a more secure position than a straight arm bar.

Then the cop tried to drop the knee. And that kicked off the fight. Dude got pissed and decided head punching was the next step.

Which is my issue with striking to secure a limb.
 
Which is my issue with striking to secure a limb.
I agree if you're not going to strike like you mean it then don't do it. That was kind of a half-hearted attempt. Maybe because he knew he was being recorded or because he knew it was a firefighter and didn't want to hurt him or he just sucked at fighting not all cops are fighters and not all cops should be cops in the first place.
 
Well so was the kimoura and the hammer lock. And they are both mechanically a more secure position than a straight arm bar.

Fair enough. Also I’m not meaning straight arm. I don’t know the nomenclature. I’m talking keeping the arm bent and using the bent arm for leverage to force him over onto his stomach.

But he still should have kept control of the arm and kept trying to force him to a prone position instead of letting go and moving to the head.
 
Back
Top