The Need to Be Recognized as Superior

[Transk53]

Care to elaborate?

Read the wrong thing. Judo can stil **** though, and in the right hands, lethal enough. Just a different arsenal.

 

[Juany118]

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"

The phrase from Romeo and Juliet is usually used today to emphasize that the name of something does not affect what it really is. It's just terminology.

I've been involved with various police departments in multiple states, both on local and Federal levels. Some call an RNC a "carotid restraint", a "lateral neck restraint" " a lateral vascular neck restraint" a "vascular neck restraint" a "cardiovascular restraint" and on and on depending what jurisdiction you're in, and more importantly, who (and when) wrote up the guide lines concerning the laws of said jurisdiction. I say "when" because police work is always changing. Twenty years ago slapping on that choke (and you guys know damn well what I'm talking about when I say "choke") could get you fired. That, too, has changed in a lot of places.

Today, you'll find in some departments this terminology - " it impacts only the circulatory system while at the same time leaving the airway unobstructed and protected during the confrontation."

And this - “neck brace principle" which helps prevent injury to the persons neck by limiting any lateral movement usually associated with high levels of resistance.

And this, on the subject of the offender losing consciousness - it is a by-product of an offender's high level of resistance, not the intended objective of the officer applying the technique. Officers are taught post-application procedure and protocol for the well-being of the offender.

And as strange as this might sound, (my opinion here) one of the reasons the choke is slowly making it's way back into law enforcement isn't because it's awesome (which it is) but it's because the American public is becoming used to seeing it, becoming familiar with it, from watching the UFC and other MMA events on television. They realize nobody's getting killed from it.

Another interesting thing about terminology I found a few years ago while working in a Physical Therapy unit was this -

The Sleeper Stretch. I thought that was just too cool for school, because as a kid, we only knew a choke as a "sleeper hold".

Pretty much agree. I also think the familiarity if why States like NY, PA etc are passing specific laws. It started years ago with Domestic violence victims advocates because usually the grading of an Assault arrest is based on the weapon used or the damage caused and strangulation can leave little overt signs. Then add in the fact that you have more and more wanna be UFC fighters out there (I have two UFC gyms within a 25 minute drive of my house) and there was even more incentive to directly address the issue on the other end.

I would just add one thing. I think it becoming more common is a mixed bag, based on the $$$ the Agency is willing to pay. Those willing to pay for the initial and continuing training see it as a way to limit the use of firearms. It is not unheard of for the officer who shot someone to say "OC didn't work, the Taser failed, he was so dang high he didn't feel my baton to I had to shoot" or as happened in the mid west recently that whole sequence of events but an officer in a hospital bed say "I didn't shoot because I didn't want to be the next controversy.". So such techniques can help officers, and thus the agency, prevent being the next YouTube sensation.

However it's about the $$$. Those who aren't willing to spend the $$$$ though, so it is used properly, will either classify it as lethal force (like LAPD) or ban it entirely (NYPD).

 

[guy b]

chances are, against a resisting subject, at best you will end up applying pressure to both the carotid and the airway.

Nope, very easy to apply pressure as required. Granted the police often suffocate people or crush their throats, resulting in horrible death, but that very low level of understanding and execution should not be the standard by which such methods are judged.

You could say "I wasn't trying to strangle them I was just trying to apply a blood choke" and you still violated this particular statute

If you said that then it would be obvious that you didn't understand the difference between choking and strangling. If a policeman said that then it would be obvious that he also had no clue, which would be quite worrying.

when I say "choke" I will be referring specifically to strangulation and that a carotid obstruction is a carotid restraint.

Found it kinda funny, and on point, that I just received an email regarding a law that will be effective in 2 weeks.

The fact that the people writing the law have as much understanding of the difference between chokes and strangles as you do (i.e. zero) is not something you should feel happy about

 

[Juany118]

Nope, very easy to apply pressure as required. Granted the police often suffocate people or crush their throats, resulting in horrible death, but that very low level of understanding and execution should not be the standard by which such methods are judged.



If you said that then it would be obvious that you didn't understand the difference between choking and strangling. If a policeman said that then it would be obvious that he also had no clue, which would be quite worrying.







The fact that the people writing the law have as much understanding of the difference between chokes and strangles as you do (i.e. zero) is not something you should feel happy about

I am only going to address your last bit because first if you honestly believe that applying a carotid restraint on a fully resisting subject is easy to apply, that is proof you have never experienced it so no sense addressing it further. Secondly the other things you facepalm over is because I base my language when speaking about how MA techniques are seen by the law on...the law. They don't apply in your school fine, but I am not talking about, I am talking about the law and there I think is the real problem...you just don't like how you initial point about how it's fine to choke out people is potentially illegal in different places.

The law is written as it is because it tries to avoid gray areas. As an example if you shoot someone you shot them... The law isn't going to address "oh but he meant to shoot them in the leg" because that invites someone to say "oh I only meant to shoot em in the leg to injure...how did I know it would hit the femur requiring amputation". The same would apply here. They don't want to hear "I just wanted to black them out with a 'choke' not "strangle" them and make it so then needed surgery to speak again."

It is actually as easy to kill with a carotid restraint as it is compromising the airway, arguably easier since people black out more quickly. The only difference is that it is easier to permanently damage the airway. Both however can be lethal. This is why the law is written the way it is. Two types of "attacks" to the same general area, both of which can result in serious injury or death. They understand the mechanics. It's just since the laws being passed undercut your prior argument you need to paint the authors as ignorant.

That last bit really is your raison d'etre. If someone posts facts contradicting your belief someone else has to be ignorant because you can never be wrong. On this last point especially it's likely smarter to just say "oh I didn't know some places had laws like that, okay check your local statues."




Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[guy b]

if you honestly believe that applying a carotid restraint on a fully resisting subject is easy to apply, that is proof you have never experienced it so no sense addressing it further

I have often rendered fully resisting opponents unconscious. In comparison doing the same to a person who doesn't know what they are doing, or what is happening to them is very easy. Obviously though doing so safely and reliably requires a lot of time and effort which police training fails to make up for. Mostly the problem with police restraints is that they are taught in a very basic way without any realistic conception of control, and so all too often law enforcement operatives end up muscling it and hurting or killing people

It is actually as easy to kill with a carotid restraint as it is compromising the airway, arguably easier since people black out more quickly. The only difference is that it is easier to permanently damage the airway. Both however can be lethal.

It is much harder to kill someone by compressing the airway than it is by limiting the blood supply to the brain. But it is much safer to practice limiting the blood supply to the brain than limiting the supply of air, provided you know what you are doing. Recovery from unconsciousness is much more reliable after the limitation is released in the former than the latter.

Both however can be lethal. This is why the law is written the way it is.

You provided evidence that the law in whatever part of the world you live doesn't differentiate between chokes and strangles (air chokes and blood chokes), despite the massive difference between them. This may partially explain your ignorance of the subject, but doesn't make up for all of the wasted time, and I fail to see the relevance.

 

[Juany118]

Nvm

 

[anerlich]

I am only going to address your last bit because first if you honestly believe that applying a carotid restraint on a fully resisting subject is easy to apply, that is proof you have never experienced it so no sense addressing it further.

It's not easy, but it's hardly impossible. Between me and the others at my Jiu Jitsu school we've probably done it to each other several hundred times in the last few years. At least. Not just against full resistance, but skilled full resistance. No one was hurt or hospitalised as a result. They regained conscious after a few seconds if they didn't tap, and jumped straight back in to wrestling again more fired up than before. I got a guy with a RNC this morning at training. Believe me, he was resisting as fully as he possibly could.

People choke/strangle others out in BJJ and MMA competition all the time. And there's no resistance like that of a skilled competitor. I was refereeing at one comp where one poor guy got choked unconscious twice by two different opponents, one by baseball choke, the other by some weird a$$ lapel choke I'd not seen before. He was fine.

People have been applying chokes on each other for over a century at the Kodokan with no fatalities.

Several instances came up on my Facebook feed in the last few years of women trained in Jiu Jitsu who have successfully strangled would-be rapists unconscious with triangle chokes. Presumably they were prosecuted afterwards for using these deadly techniques :/

I can remember a number of instances where friends of mine have successfully stopped confrontations with rear naked chokes (actually, strangles). None of them were prosecuted, nothing got hurt except pride. IANAL but I'm pretty sure such measures are viewed much more favourably then punching someone in my jurisdiction.

Plenty of people in Sydney doing hard time for punching someone once, them falling down and hitting their head on concrete, and dying as a result.

If you are defending yourself successfully, you are almost certainly going to do stuff to people that would be illegal had they not attacked you. You talk about concern for the law but are practising what a number of people over the years have claimed to be the most deadly martial art in the world, including William Cheung, IIRC. Don't use him as your character reference in court if you hit someone too hard.

Any decent Jiu Jitsu student can tell the difference between an airway choke and a strangle when done to them, and usually when they are doing it to someone else. Mixing the two (blood and airway attacks) is usually the result of poor technique less effective in rendering the person unconscious. Good technique is targeted at a specific result.

Some strangles, like the triangle, are probably impossible to perform as an airway choke. A properly perform rear naked choke is a strangle. An effective RNC will allow the stranglee to keep breathing, but they go unconscious because of the carotid pressure.

The data simply doesn't support your claims, nor does the anecdotal evidence of those who apply such techniques to others regularly, or have the techniques applied to them. Including mine.

 

[anerlich]

The guy giving the legal points isn't giving them as a "Wing Chun guy", but as a police officer. What art he studies (or if he studies one at all) is irrelevant to that information.

The fact that he does Wing Chun rather than a grappling style is relevant to his assertions regarding the differentiations between various choke/strangle techniques and their effects, which I mostly disagree with. From a base of experience using said techniques.

My comments re the law weren't just about him. I am happy to accept his assertions about the law in his jurisdiction. I don't live in the same country, so it's not my particular circus, not my monkeys.

 

[anerlich]

And as strange as this might sound, (my opinion here) one of the reasons the choke is slowly making it's way back into law enforcement isn't because it's awesome (which it is) but it's because the American public is becoming used to seeing it, becoming familiar with it, from watching the UFC and other MMA events on television. They realize nobody's getting killed from it.

Another interesting thing about terminology I found a few years ago while working in a Physical Therapy unit was this -



The Sleeper Stretch. I thought that was just too cool for school, because as a kid, we only knew a choke as a "sleeper hold".

Interesting stuff.

I have an A/C joint separation which gives me pins and needles in the bottom arm if I sleep on that side. Might try that stretch out.

 

[Juany118]

It's not easy, but it's hardly impossible. Between me and the others at my Jiu Jitsu school we've probably done it to each other several hundred times in the last few years.

I will never deny this. Been there done that. My point was only focused on two points. First, and it pisses off my wife even (I am anal retentive about rules/law), if the law says "it can get your *** in a sling avoid it and in some jurisdictions it does.

Second I was only ever saying "check your local laws". And I am not exaggerating that today I got a legal update via email for my state that says "any hold on the neck if not justified specifically via self defense is a seperate charge tagged onto a "simple" assault. That was my point.

Check your laws. If you can go for that neck with no repercussions fine. But check because there are places where, if you can't explain why you you went there for objective you may be screwed.

Welcome to the USA where 50 different States can come up with 50 different crimes. Don't mean to seem flippant but it can honestly be that way here.

PS, I study WC AND Kali (FMA) so I also study grappling, you seem to assume since the FMA forum is largely inactive that I only study WC, not true. Even then my WC via GM William Cheung has Chin Na. Where this "WC has no grappling" comes from makes my head hurt because I have joints that say otherwise from training.

 

[anerlich]

I will never deny this.

You implied pretty much the exact opposite.

I'm not in a position to argue about US legalities. Nor in a position to care.

 

[anerlich]

Been there done that.

If you say so. You've choked someone out at least once every couple of weeks for fifteen years?

Even then my WC via GM William Cheung has Chin Na. Where this "WC has no grappling" comes from makes my head hurt because I have joints that say otherwise from training.

I've been studying that lineage since 1989. William Cheung signed my Gold Sash certificate in 1995. Red Sash in 2011. Whatever your joints and your head say, there's way more to it than that.

 

[Juany118]

You said pretty much the exact opposite.

I'm not in a position to argue about US legalities. Nor in a position to care.

On the first point I am not, and never will, talk about in school, training. We all go to different schools with different attitudes. I will only speak about application in reality...the person who is saying "you want to actually hurt my/take me to jail.". What happens in a school doesn't come close to that.

As for the last, law in various States of the USA, fine, no worries.

 

[Juany118]

If you say so. You've choked someone out at least once every couple of weeks for fifteen years?



I've been studying that lineage since 1989. William Cheung signed my Gold Sash certificate in 1995. Red Sash in 2011. Whatever your joints and your head say, there's way more to it than that.

Then I would suggest the both of us PM each other for reasons I will PM you about became I agree, but I think a personal discussion on our lineage needs some common ground before a public debate occurs.

 

[anerlich]

On the first point I am not, and never will, talk about in school, training. We all go to different schools with different attitudes. I will only speak about application in reality...the person who is saying "you want to actually hurt my/take me to jail.". What happens in a school doesn't come close to that.

I did mention some real world incidents. Not in a LEO or military context, I concede. Though BJJ seems to be of great interest to many such organisations.

My only interest is civilian self defence.

 

[Juany118]

]

I did mention some real world incidents. Not in a LEO or military context, I concede. Though BJJ seems to be of great interest to many such organisations.

My only interest is civilian self defence.

BJJ is certainly useful, as is the Kali I study along side WC (part of the issue we may have here is I tend to not draw lines between my WC and my Kali but I sent you a video for a little WC grappling to see if that fits with your image).

But my point never was about LE or Civilian application, only "if you study martial arts, check the laws where you live before you do something". No more, no less. Basically just "protect yourself physically AND legally.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The fact that he does Wing Chun rather than a grappling style is relevant to his assertions regarding the differentiations between various choke/strangle techniques and their effects, which I mostly disagree with. From a base of experience using said techniques.

My comments re the law weren't just about him. I am happy to accept his assertions about the law in his jurisdiction. I don't live in the same country, so it's not my particular circus, not my monkeys.

Those points of law were all I mentioned.


Gerry Seymour
Shojin-Ryu, Nihon Goshin Aikido

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It's not easy, but it's hardly impossible. Between me and the others at my Jiu Jitsu school we've probably done it to each other several hundred times in the last few years. At least. Not just against full resistance, but skilled full resistance. No one was hurt or hospitalised as a result. They regained conscious after a few seconds if they didn't tap, and jumped straight back in to wrestling again more fired up than before. I got a guy with a RNC this morning at training. Believe me, he was resisting as fully as he possibly could.

People choke/strangle others out in BJJ and MMA competition all the time. And there's no resistance like that of a skilled competitor. I was refereeing at one comp where one poor guy got choked unconscious twice by two different opponents, one by baseball choke, the other by some weird a$$ lapel choke I'd not seen before. He was fine.

People have been applying chokes on each other for over a century at the Kodokan with no fatalities.

Several instances came up on my Facebook feed in the last few years of women trained in Jiu Jitsu who have successfully strangled would-be rapists unconscious with triangle chokes. Presumably they were prosecuted afterwards for using these deadly techniques :/

I can remember a number of instances where friends of mine have successfully stopped confrontations with rear naked chokes (actually, strangles). None of them were prosecuted, nothing got hurt except pride. IANAL but I'm pretty sure such measures are viewed much more favourably then punching someone in my jurisdiction.

Plenty of people in Sydney doing hard time for punching someone once, them falling down and hitting their head on concrete, and dying as a result.

If you are defending yourself successfully, you are almost certainly going to do stuff to people that would be illegal had they not attacked you. You talk about concern for the law but are practising what a number of people over the years have claimed to be the most deadly martial art in the world, including William Cheung, IIRC. Don't use him as your character reference in court if you hit someone too hard.

Any decent Jiu Jitsu student can tell the difference between an airway choke and a strangle when done to them, and usually when they are doing it to someone else. Mixing the two (blood and airway attacks) is usually the result of poor technique less effective in rendering the person unconscious. Good technique is targeted at a specific result.

Some strangles, like the triangle, are probably impossible to perform as an airway choke. A properly perform rear naked choke is a strangle. An effective RNC will allow the stranglee to keep breathing, but they go unconscious because of the carotid pressure.

The data simply doesn't support your claims, nor does the anecdotal evidence of those who apply such techniques to others regularly, or have the techniques applied to them. Including mine.

I'm not sure how significant it is from a risk standpoint, but there is a very real difference between applying a choke to a trained partner and someone who doesn't know what you are doing. Resistance Ina BJJ class won't include extreme flailing, unless someone panics, and then you'd probably just let them go. That flailing (due to lack of skill and possibly because they think you're going to really hurt them) can absolutely happen in a defensive situation.


Gerry Seymour
Shojin-Ryu, Nihon Goshin Aikido

 

[Buka]

Nope, very easy to apply pressure as required. Granted the police often suffocate people or crush their throats, resulting in horrible death, but that very low level of understanding and execution should not be the standard by which such methods are judged.



If you said that then it would be obvious that you didn't understand the difference between choking and strangling. If a policeman said that then it would be obvious that he also had no clue, which would be quite worrying.







The fact that the people writing the law have as much understanding of the difference between chokes and strangles as you do (i.e. zero) is not something you should feel happy about

A bit harsh there, bro.

 

[guy b]

I'm not sure how significant it is from a risk standpoint, but there is a very real difference between applying a choke to a trained partner and someone who doesn't know what you are doing. Resistance Ina BJJ class won't include extreme flailing, unless someone panics, and then you'd probably just let them go. That flailing (due to lack of skill and possibly because they think you're going to really hurt them) can absolutely happen in a defensive situation.

Choke defence in BJJ doesn't include extreme flailing mostly because that isn't a very effective way to defenc chokes.