Police MMA - Has anyone tried to modify MMA to make it more applicable to police?

[Hawk79]

Problem #1: What do you mean by MMA? There is no set system of what makes up MMA, so depending on what country you live in, the arts vary. Even here in the US, some favor a more "western" approach and use boxing/wrestling others may favor muay thai/bjj, while still others may favor muay thai/wrestling. Looking at more recent competitions, you are starting to see more TKD kicking elements in it also.

Problem #2: MMA is set up to be the most successful in a set environment with a specific ruleset. For example, Pride vs. UFC different strategies and tactics were seen based on the ruleset and ring/cage environment.

So....if you are just talking about certain skillsets that are usually found in MMA, such as, Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling, BJJ and adding in weapon control etc. Then you would be reinventing the wheel because that is pretty much what Krav Maga for LEO's does.

I am definitely not looking to reinvent the wheel. I have read a lot of police defensive tactics and they are simply not teaching effective techniques. Now of course there are people out there who are working on developing a more practical approach for police - and that is what I am wanting to learn more about. It is not that I am trying to invent something, I am trying to find information about it. In this case, you just gave me a perfect answer - Krav Maga for LEO. I never thought to look into that. I will say that I have read a bit about normal Krav Maga as well as watched various tutorials. I was not impressed - but I assume that LEO Krav Maga might be more practical perhaps? I will look it up.

One day I would like to teach police officers a type of police orientated Jiu Jitsu (and whatever other skills I can pick up) - but I have to first learn it from somewhere (the police orientation part). So, i'm looking for ideas, suggestions, direction etc etc.

From my uninformed perspective, the fundamentals of MMA are the same. Please correct me if i'm wrong. But i'm assuming that everyone who is doing MMA has the same fundamental boxing, kicking, wrestling, and jiu jitsu skills. I'm not saying that there isn't differences. But I assume every experienced MMA fighter knows what a jab, cross, hook, and uppercut is. I also assume that all of them know what mount, guard, side control is. Rear naked chokes, etc etc.

Regardless of what an MMA fighter's background is, they are involved in live sparring. They are not learning techniques that will theoretically work... so to me it does not matter if there is no set system. In my opinion it is the experience of an MMA fighter that qualifies them to comment on the subject.

I used to do Karate. I learned many techniques. But the karate I did, does not qualify me to comment on the subject of police defensive tactics or even self defence. That's because the way I learned Karate was completely ineffective. I could only offer theories about what might work in a given situation.

 

[Hot Lunch]

As for BJJ, I'm not sure about police officers being able to roll with all their gear on like that. Best case scenario, all of their hard gear is being pressed into their bodies, causing too much physical pain for the officer to be able to win that fight. Worse case scenario, the gun or tazer gets pressed against something the wrong way, and now it's officer down. I kind of always figured that police officers use just enough hand to hand in order to establish the distance and timing necessary to use a tazer or other item. I just don't think it's wise for a police officer to go "toe-to-toe" with a criminal in a way that "MMA" implies. I'm not a cop, nor have I ever been one, so I'm interested in seeing what those with law enforcement experience have to say about this.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I'm not offended. Thanks for your response. I'm not in law enforcement and I don't plan to be. I'm just really interested in police defensive tactics and improving this aspect of policing. One day it would be cool if I could teach modified Jiu Jitsu (Like Gracie Survival Tactics) to Police just as part of a free class outside their work hours (not formally connected to the police).

Well, you say you're not LE and then go on to describe what LE is allowed to do and not do and when they're allowed to do it.

With regard to what's allowed and not allowed in MMA vs LE, I've seen the list of no-no's in MMA.

What Moves Are Banned in The UFC?

Mix Martial Art combines many different martial arts together. Many MMA fans are unaware of the rules. Some people even think that there are no rules inside the cage.

www.elitesports.com

I used many of those moves, and I'm sure cops today continue to do so. A nightstick to the groin is a favorite. Small joint manipulation? Man, I'll peel those fingers like a bunch of bananas.

But most of all, there are no rules for escalation in police work as you seem to think exist. A person resists having handcuffs put on, but with no intent to injure the police officer? Yeah, no. We assume that anyone resisting intends to injure us and react accordingly. Doing otherwise would be dumb. It's not a slowly escalating hierarchy of responses. It's habbeus grabbus.

I worked with a couple young Marine MPs who didn't quite get that. I was called to a gate one night in Okinawa. They had a drunk Marine bodybuilder who was refusing to show his ID. They didn't know what to do next, they just kept ordering him to show his ID and he kept refusing. I told them to apprehend him. They told him to turn around and put his hands on the gate shack and again he refused. I gave him a straight shot with my nightstick right in the solar plexus. He dropped to his knees and I kicked him over on his side and stood on his back while my newbies put the hand irons on. I have three rules. Ask 'em, tell 'em, take 'em. No exceptions.

 

[Anarax]

The Japanese police have their own hybrid martial art that takes techniques from various styles of Japanese martial arts. The video below explains its history, techniques and methods

 

[drop bear]

As for BJJ, I'm not sure about police officers being able to roll with all their gear on like that. Best case scenario, all of their hard gear is being pressed into their bodies, causing too much physical pain for the officer to be able to win that fight. Worse case scenario, the gun or tazer gets pressed against something the wrong way, and now it's officer down. I kind of always figured that police officers use just enough hand to hand in order to establish the distance and timing necessary to use a tazer or other item. I just don't think it's wise for a police officer to go "toe-to-toe" with a criminal in a way that "MMA" implies. I'm not a cop, nor have I ever been one, so I'm interested in seeing what those with law enforcement experience have to say about this.

So long as you are not doing it for hours you should be OK.

You should be able to roll around with kit on.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=300023739250027

 

[Hawk79]

@Bill Mattocks said:

Well, you say you're not LE and then go on to describe what LE is allowed to do and not do and when they're allowed to do it.

I clarified that I have read many police defensive tactics manuals. I also advised I have done a type of Jiu Jitsu which had been specifically modified for security guards but was applicable to policing as well.

I should also add that I am quite knowledgeable about use of force and self defence law. I have not come to this forum ignorant of police defensive tactics or the laws that they operate under - I have been studying comparative law (in other words, how laws are different between countries) for many years. Specifically self defence laws but I am also reasonably familiar with use of force.

I have also spoken with police about this subject as it is an area of great interest to me.

One of my friends is a corrections officer and we also discuss the subject a lot.

@Bill Mattocks said:

no rules for escalation in police work as you seem to think exist.

There literally is. I don't know where you are getting your information from but you have been misinformed. There is literally this thing called "Use of force continuum". You can read more about it here:

Use of force continuum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Use of Force continuum is not used by every law enforcement agency and there are criticisms of it. For one, some favour just teaching the legal standard and holding officers to account for the legal standard on use of force law.

I could talk at considerable length about the applicable legal standards. These are standards that have been subject to considerable judicial comment in case law.

I specifically referred you to the Use of Force continuum because I know for a fact it has widespread use in the United States and your profile says you live in Michigan.

You can read the Michigan State Police Use of Force policy here.

@Bill Mattocks said:

I gave him a straight shot with my nightstick right in the solar plexus. He dropped to his knees and I kicked him over on his side and stood on his back while my newbies put the hand irons on. I have three rules.

Based solely on your description of the incident, that would likely breach use of force policy for most police agencies. Potentially it is a breach of the law - although it could simply be that I don't have the full context/details.

@Bill Mattocks said:

I have three rules. Ask 'em, tell 'em, take 'em. No exceptions.

This is either a massive oversimplification of your training or it was not part of your training.

The only other explanation I could imagine would be that you are a police officer in a country outside of the US but that your profile has not been updated to reflect you no longer live in Michigan. I don't know which country that would be because like I said, I study comparative law - I know about Use of Force law in the United States, but I also know about it in Australia, and in Canada. For a while there I even studied South African law (I remember almost nothing about it) Admittedly, I am bit rusty as I have not kept up to date or being studying this recently. Where are you a police officer? What jurisdiction allows you to take this approach?

If you are a police officer anywhere in the United States I would expect Graham v. Connor to apply to your role.

@Bill Mattocks

A person resists having handcuffs put on, but with no intent to injure the police officer? Yeah, no. We assume that anyone resisting intends to injure us and react accordingly.

I interpret you to be saying that if someone resists you putting handcuffs on them it is open season and you can become violently assaultive towards them on the basis that you believe that they are intending to injure you. There is no legal system that I am aware of where that type of mindset would work. Specifically because that sounds more like speculative reasoning. It is not a reasonable inference to draw that if someone resists being handcuffs that they are intending to injure you. You have not established an evidential foundation for your belief.

Would you be able to link me to your departments policy where it permits you to respond in such a way? I note that the policy is almost certainly unlawful.

@Bill Mattocks said:

A nightstick to the groin is a favorite.

That is going to be illegal - quite literally assault in the vast majority of situations a police officer finds themselves in.

A lot of what you have said leads me to believe that you are not familiar with basic principles of criminal law. For example, your comments suggest a lack of understanding about how evidential burdens, evidential foundations, self defence, and use of force law works.

I want to emphasis that I realise that there are differences between jurisdictions, but for the most part, the stuff you appear to misunderstand is pretty consistent within common law countries - and probably within civil law countries as well.

Thank you to everyone else for their helpful additions. I really appreciate it @drop bear ; @Anarax ; @Hot Lunch

 

[Hawk79]

I forgot to add this one:

Intermediate weapons – an amount of force that would have a high probability of causing soft connective tissue damage or bone fractures. (e.g. expandable baton, baton, pepper spray, Taser, beanbag rounds, rubber fin stabilized ammunition, Mace (spray), police dogs, etc.) Intermediate weapon techniques are designed to impact muscles, arms and legs, and intentionally using an intermediate weapon on the head, neck, groin, knee caps, or spine would be classified as deadly or lethal force.

I assume you can see that a night stick would fall within the meaning of an intermediate weapon - similar to a baton. In otherwords, it's literally saying that your use of a night stick "on the... groin... would be classified as deadly or lethal force".

 

[drop bear]

I forgot to add this one:



I assume you can see that a night stick would fall within the meaning of an intermediate weapon - similar to a baton. In otherwords, it's literally saying that your use of a night stick "on the... groin... would be classified as deadly or lethal forforce"

There was a time when cops had more license to bash people. Not legal but not prosecuted. Less cameras, less people willing to go through the process to convict cops.

It had its good and bad points. Cops obviously went too far with it. But it was very efficient. As you would often get bashed and let go which is less time consuming.

Obviously if you are developing a system now. You can't really employ those methods.

And on that note. The more robust you make defensive tactics for police the less they will go off script and hurt people.

And this ties back in to MMA and its live resisted training methods. Part of being a MMA fighter is to be able to train without maiming all of your sparring partners. Whilst developing the tools that can be used to maim people.

It means you get a sense of how much force you should use to how big the threat is.

 

[drop bear]

Now a lot of my examples are BJJ. So we could conclude BJJ is the best system for police as an all grappling style.

But it is sort of. MMA grappling prioritises getting back up from bad positions. Where BJJ kind of prioritises attacking from bad positions.

So I will use folk wrestling as an example. Just because it is easier to see.

And if you look closely the defence is almost always to try to stand back up
Which for self defence work is probably the better place to be.

Bjj they don't stand back up alot. But they fight from that position.

MMA grappling kind of splits the difference

Now there is a third trick at play. And that is if you win fights. It doesn't matter if you did what is technically optimal. So guys do these styles and just get good enough at fighting where it mostly doesn't matter.

 

[Hawk79]

Now a lot of my examples are BJJ. So we could conclude BJJ is the best system for police as an all grappling style.

But it is sort of. MMA grappling prioritises getting back up from bad positions. Where BJJ kind of prioritises attacking from bad positions.

So I will use folk wrestling as an example. Just because it is easier to see.

And if you look closely the defence is almost always to try to stand back up
Which for self defence work is probably the better place to be.

Bjj they don't stand back up alot. But they fight from that position.

MMA grappling kind of splits the difference

Now there is a third trick at play. And that is if you win fights. It doesn't matter if you did what is technically optimal. So guys do these styles and just get good enough at fighting where it mostly doesn't matter.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. The Jocko one was pretty cool.

I have only done a little bit of wrestling as part of my Jiu Jitsu training. A lot of the stuff I have learned so far involves me putting my knee on to the ground in ways that would be quite painful when done on concrete. Is there much wrestling that can be done that does not involve the knees? It might just be my limited exposure to it. But I like the idea of focusing on getting up.

 

[punisher73]

I'll be honest, what cops need isn't "better techniques". What cops need to do is actually train in SOMETHING.

Let's go with the standard "PPCT" curriculum since that is probably the most widespread for agencies.

Some of the empty hand striking weapons: Straight Punch, Heel Palm, Forearm Strikes/Elbows, Knees, Roundhouse Kick, Front Kick

Just those alone if trained and learned to use effectively would be good for the vast majority of situations.

How are those ANY different than suddenly saying that you are going to train cops in "MMA". Is the straight punch or roundhouse kick suddenly magically different? Nope.

I have been a defensive tactics instructor for probably around 20 years and worked in LE for over 25 years and have trained in martial arts for almost 30 years. So, I do have a little background on this topic.

In the end it doesn't matter how great GST is or LE Krav Maga is if the officer doesn't consistently train. It would be WAY better to have an officer find SOME type of martial arts class and attend on a regular basis than to get the "latest and greatest" defensive tactics program once a year to check the box.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

@Bill Mattocks said:

Where are you a police officer? What jurisdiction allows you to take this approach?

I have an Associates Degree in Criminal Justice and I was a Military Policeman in the USMC from 1979-1985. I worked at Camp Pendleton, CA, Okinawa, Japan, Perth, Western Australia, and Nicaragua. I worked for a civilian police department in the Denver metro area from 88-90 as a dispatcher. I left LE when I got my degree in Computer Science and decided I liked that better, plus I didn't get shot at or stabbed quite so often.

A lot of what you have said leads me to believe that you are not familiar with basic principles of criminal law. For example, your comments suggest a lack of understanding about how evidential burdens, evidential foundations, self defence, and use of force law works.

Constitutional Law was my favorite in college. My education may be out of date, but I'm far from unfamiliar with principles of law, etc. I've spent a lot of time in courtrooms as a witness for the prosecution. I've also taken advanced post-grad courses in government law regarding contracting, the FAR and DFARS, but that's a different story.

If you've read anything I have posted here in the past, you'd know that I am one of the few people here who advocate for people who choose to arm themselves in public read and become familiar with their state's laws regarding self-defense and use of deadly force, and to consult an attorney if they still feel uncertain about terms like 'Castle Doctrine' and 'Stand Your Ground' and 'Duty to Retreat' and 'reasonable person' standard and so on. This is the same reason I complain about people who hear someone breaking into their car, run outside with a gun, and shoot the person as he runs away, explaining over and over again in vain how that does not constitute 'self-defense'.

So I maybe know a little bit about the law.

In the situation I mentioned, I was a patrol sgt for the military police at Camp Foster in Okinawa in 1983. Said drunken Marine chose to disregard repeated lawful orders to surrender, and resisted being compelled to be patted down and handcuffed. I applied a pain compliance technique using the tip of my nightstick to his solar plexus, took him to the ground by kicking his legs out from under him, and compelled him to remain motionless while my newer teammates patted him down for weapons and applied handcuffs. We then transported him to PMO, processed him, and turned him over to his area guard for further disposition. It was written up in the morning blotter, the CO signed off on it, and that was the end of it. In my judgment, offering the drunken body-building Marine a cookie and a glass of warm milk wasn't going to obtain his cooperation. Perhaps I should have sung him a song.

I want to emphasis that I realise that there are differences between jurisdictions, but for the most part, the stuff you appear to misunderstand is pretty consistent within common law countries - and probably within civil law countries as well.

Well, I did my job and seemed to be pretty well regarded for it. I earned all my ranks meritoriously and got out of the USMC after six years as a Sergeant. Not bad if you ask me.

As a police dispatcher, I was merely waiting for an opening on the patrol side, but left before one came open. I was offered a job as a sheriff's deputy for Jefferson County in Colorado and was scheduled to begin training when I was offered my first computer job at three times the pay, so that was the end of my law enforcement career.

Thank you to everyone else for their helpful additions. I really appreciate it @drop bear ; @Anarax ; @Hot Lunch

 

[drop bear]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. The Jocko one was pretty cool.

I have only done a little bit of wrestling as part of my Jiu Jitsu training. A lot of the stuff I have learned so far involves me putting my knee on to the ground in ways that would be quite painful when done on concrete. Is there much wrestling that can be done that does not involve the knees? It might just be my limited exposure to it. But I like the idea of focusing on getting up.

MMA tends to do less of that.

 

[jks9199]

@Bill Mattocks said:

I clarified that I have read many police defensive tactics manuals. I also advised I have done a type of Jiu Jitsu which had been specifically modified for security guards but was applicable to policing as well.

I should also add that I am quite knowledgeable about use of force and self defence law. I have not come to this forum ignorant of police defensive tactics or the laws that they operate under - I have been studying comparative law (in other words, how laws are different between countries) for many years. Specifically self defence laws but I am also reasonably familiar with use of force.

I have also spoken with police about this subject as it is an area of great interest to me.

One of my friends is a corrections officer and we also discuss the subject a lot.

@Bill Mattocks said:

There literally is. I don't know where you are getting your information from but you have been misinformed. There is literally this thing called "Use of force continuum". You can read more about it here:

Use of force continuum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Use of Force continuum is not used by every law enforcement agency and there are criticisms of it. For one, some favour just teaching the legal standard and holding officers to account for the legal standard on use of force law.

I could talk at considerable length about the applicable legal standards. These are standards that have been subject to considerable judicial comment in case law.

I specifically referred you to the Use of Force continuum because I know for a fact it has widespread use in the United States and your profile says you live in Michigan.

You can read the Michigan State Police Use of Force policy here.

@Bill Mattocks said:


Based solely on your description of the incident, that would likely breach use of force policy for most police agencies. Potentially it is a breach of the law - although it could simply be that I don't have the full context/details.

@Bill Mattocks said:

This is either a massive oversimplification of your training or it was not part of your training.

The only other explanation I could imagine would be that you are a police officer in a country outside of the US but that your profile has not been updated to reflect you no longer live in Michigan. I don't know which country that would be because like I said, I study comparative law - I know about Use of Force law in the United States, but I also know about it in Australia, and in Canada. For a while there I even studied South African law (I remember almost nothing about it) Admittedly, I am bit rusty as I have not kept up to date or being studying this recently. Where are you a police officer? What jurisdiction allows you to take this approach?

If you are a police officer anywhere in the United States I would expect Graham v. Connor to apply to your role.

@Bill Mattocks


I interpret you to be saying that if someone resists you putting handcuffs on them it is open season and you can become violently assaultive towards them on the basis that you believe that they are intending to injure you. There is no legal system that I am aware of where that type of mindset would work. Specifically because that sounds more like speculative reasoning. It is not a reasonable inference to draw that if someone resists being handcuffs that they are intending to injure you. You have not established an evidential foundation for your belief.

Would you be able to link me to your departments policy where it permits you to respond in such a way? I note that the policy is almost certainly unlawful.

@Bill Mattocks said:

That is going to be illegal - quite literally assault in the vast majority of situations a police officer finds themselves in.

A lot of what you have said leads me to believe that you are not familiar with basic principles of criminal law. For example, your comments suggest a lack of understanding about how evidential burdens, evidential foundations, self defence, and use of force law works.

I want to emphasis that I realise that there are differences between jurisdictions, but for the most part, the stuff you appear to misunderstand is pretty consistent within common law countries - and probably within civil law countries as well.

Thank you to everyone else for their helpful additions. I really appreciate it @drop bear ; @Anarax ; @Hot Lunch

I'll have to come back to this when I'm not typing on a phone... but I would suggest that your understanding is not as complete as you think it is. In very brief... the force used by an officer must be reasonable, justifiable, and proportionate to the resistance encountered. An officer is justified in using that force which is reasonably necessary to safely accomplish a lawful goal.

 

[drop bear]

I disagree. I probably didn't explain myself well. Being able to fight is probably the easiest (from an academic perspective) part of defensive tactics. It will be very useful to a police officer who finds him or herself in a situation where they are being aggressively attacked and need to protect themselves. It will also be useful in giving the officer confidence (which may make other aspects of defensive tactics easier). Being able to fight is probably the least interesting part of police defensive tactics (although it is still pretty interesting - i'm a martial artist myself).

In most cases, police are not being aggressively attacked. So the well-rounded fighting capability of an MMA fighter does not solve many of the situations that a police officer will find themselves in.

As an example, what could a police officer do if they needed to break up an unlawful assembly and people had linked hands and sat down? Knowing how to fight does not really help the police officer in this situation. An MMA fighter could kick each person in the head one by one, knocking them out and then drag their unconscious selves away. The police don't have this as an option. Gracie Survival Tactics would suggest you grab their legs and lift them up above their head and give the foot to a officer standing behind them (effectively forcing them to do a backwards roll). This is an adaptation of Jiu Jitsu to police work.

What about a situation where someone is aggressively resisting and the officer is unable to get handcuffs on the suspect. The officer could use a kimura and then tell the suspect to place both hands behind his back in order for the pain to stop. The addition of the verbal (positive) command is essentially making a jiu jitsu technique applicable to police work.

My main experience is with Jiu Jitsu, so I don't really have any examples that apply to striking. I have only just started training striking and I am hoping to so more opportunities where striking/MMA might be able to be modified to be useful for police.

The only example I can think of right now is distance management. Police need to maintain a safe distance from someone who they are talking to on the streets or at traffic stops. Some kind of modified boxing drill would probably help them to be more aware of distance management.

Ok. Just revisiting this idea. Being able to fight allows you to solve problems that you may not have been taught to do.

So you get a guy who may never have handcuffed a guy before but has enough basic martial arts skill to figure it out on the fly

Now obviously you can optimise the training to make it relevant to the task. But the training itself creates this mental elasticity that allows for new situations

 

[Hawk79]

I'll have to come back to this when I'm not typing on a phone... but I would suggest that your understanding is not as complete as you think it is. In very brief... the force used by an officer must be reasonable, justifiable, and proportionate to the resistance encountered. An officer is justified in using that force which is reasonably necessary to safely accomplish a lawful goal.

That is basically my understanding although I would go further to clarify how the courts make these kinds of determinations - I actually think that is more important for people to understand when it comes to things like self defence. For example, I meet a lot of people who say "I'll just say I feared for my life because everyone is on drugs nowadays and you can't be too careful". Hopefully you can see that a statement like that is going to land people in trouble.

I don't think that I have suggested that what you said is not the case. We both seem to be saying that there are rules and standards that police must follow. WIth that said, I am keen to hear your thoughts on the subject so please let me know.

 

[Mider]

Many cops use many different systems besides MMA, Kali, aikido, Japanese martial arts, etc

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

MMA would be especially useful in a law enforcement context?

 

[drop bear]

Ok. Just revisiting this idea. Being able to fight allows you to solve problems that you may not have been taught to do.

So you get a guy who may never have handcuffed a guy before but has enough basic martial arts skill to figure it out on the fly

Now obviously you can optimise the training to make it relevant to the task. But the training itself creates this mental elasticity that allows for new situations

 

[Buka]

Well, you say you're not LE and then go on to describe what LE is allowed to do and not do and when they're allowed to do it.

With regard to what's allowed and not allowed in MMA vs LE, I've seen the list of no-no's in MMA.

What Moves Are Banned in The UFC?

Mix Martial Art combines many different martial arts together. Many MMA fans are unaware of the rules. Some people even think that there are no rules inside the cage.

www.elitesports.com

I used many of those moves, and I'm sure cops today continue to do so. A nightstick to the groin is a favorite. Small joint manipulation? Man, I'll peel those fingers like a bunch of bananas.

But most of all, there are no rules for escalation in police work as you seem to think exist. A person resists having handcuffs put on, but with no intent to injure the police officer? Yeah, no. We assume that anyone resisting intends to injure us and react accordingly. Doing otherwise would be dumb. It's not a slowly escalating hierarchy of responses. It's habbeus grabbus.

I worked with a couple young Marine MPs who didn't quite get that. I was called to a gate one night in Okinawa. They had a drunk Marine bodybuilder who was refusing to show his ID. They didn't know what to do next, they just kept ordering him to show his ID and he kept refusing. I told them to apprehend him. They told him to turn around and put his hands on the gate shack and again he refused. I gave him a straight shot with my nightstick right in the solar plexus. He dropped to his knees and I kicked him over on his side and stood on his back while my newbies put the hand irons on. I have three rules. Ask 'em, tell 'em, take 'em. No exceptions.

Ask 'em, tell 'em, take 'em. No exceptions.