Why You and
Your Officers Need Our
"Effective
Combatives Problem-Solving"
(Defensive Tactics/Use of Force) Program of Instruction
Practical...Tactical...Realistic...Defensible!
 Background:
Cutting Edge
Training, LLC, is recognized as the leader in the training of peace officers
in effective and defensible control skills involving outcome-based,
simple to learn, gross-motor skill dependent, non-technical defense methods designed for
your average and/or least able officers. It is based upon what
we do as human beings in a real-fight.
"Effective Combatives Problem-Solving,"© permitting your
officer to realistically problem solve defense situations
successfully. Effectively problem-solving with combative suspect
requires the officer to "get inside the suspect's OODA Loop." It
is these two philosophies upon which this training is based:
effectively problem-solving through awareness of the functioning of
crisis decision-making and its conscious application.
Paraphrasing former-US Marine Corp Commandant, Lt. General A.M. Gray,
"The best tactics not only leave (the suspect(s)) defeated, but
confused." These courses move beyond simple defensive tactics
and actually train your officers to respond as officers, and
not "martial artists who happen to be cops."
This training philosophy
represents over 30 years of development, refinement, and training to
officers who have successfully and repeatedly used the skills and
lessons learned to save their lives. Not one of our course participants
has ever made the comment that the training they attended is a
rehash of commonly found police training. Rather, we are the only
police defense system to have reverse-engineered our training to
determine what will really work in the real situations
where real peace officers have a need to defend against assault
or to control a resisting subject:
-
Practical.
This
training works for both the average officer and the athletes in
your agency. It is designed for every
officer to be successful. The concepts apply to
every officer of any size, gender, and physical condition without
resorting to complicated Aikido or jujitsu/wrestling techniques
that always work with compliant suspects (and other cops
on the training floor), but regularly
fail against resisting offenders. This system is the most
adrenaline-proofed program of defense possible, because there is
nothing complicated to remember. The problem-solving method is
built upon the human psychology of stress-response, natural human
response, and stands up to
the threat pressures experienced by officers.
-
Non-technical, outcome-based.
Almost every DT-system is based on technique. "Techniques,"
practically, are a series of
sequence dependent actions that require perfect context, perfect
execution, and perfect cooperation from the suspect, which means the
failure of any one of the actions in the sequence results in the
failure of the technique.
This leaves the officer target focused (mentally focused on
fighting for a diminished position) and goal directed (still
working for a goal--completing the technique that just failed--that is
no longer achievable), and largely ineffective following the
inevitable failure of the technique. Instead, we teach "skills"
(single actions that either fail or succeed) that are based on the
"outcome" of the event, and are accomplished through effectively
problem-solving to get inside the suspect's OODA Loop in an
objectively reasonable manner. While the officer's takedown of
the suspect in the street may not look "pretty"--and would not have
been "successful" under evaluation standards in the academy--the
reality is that any takedown, while it might have been
accomplished more efficiently, was successful if results in the
suspect being taken to the ground in an objectively reasonable manner.
-
Tactical.
Time-proven
principles of Safe Tactical Doctrine are adhered to in all
problem-solving defense efforts. Officers trained in this system
are expected to take cover when appropriate, to adhere to safe weapons
handling, and to take a tactical approach to every arrest and defense
scenario. Importantly, officers are trained to respond as
police officers, not martial artists. As participants hear
often: "Not all defensive tactics problems can be solved with
defensive tactics."©
-
Realistic.
Officers
almost never apply "trained techniques" against resisting or
assaultive suspects. We don't bother teaching techniques that
almost never work and most officers can't and won't remember a week
after training (how many of your officers have EVER performed a
takedown to a handcuffing position on a suspect who is actively
resisting?). Instead, we train officers to effectively
problem-solve in a field force response incident using simple,
effective methods of defense that are available to every
officer, regardless
of ability, strength, and size. We do not engage in any fantasy
training, expecting the suspect to simply stand there as the officer
applies a technique with ten or more sequential components needed for
success. Instead, we train for "Murphy"
and expect every effort to fail until it succeeds...just like in real
life!
-
Defensible:
This
system of defense and control is court, administratively, and
medically defensible. Every course begins with a training block
of "Constitutional Limits to the Police Force Response." All
problem-solving training is within Scott v. Harris and Graham v. Connor
restrictions under the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution.
Administratively, the system is the most easily defended program that
is simultaneously effective for all officers. Medically, the
course has been reviewed by neurologists and chiropractors who have
vetted the training.
The
"Effective Combatives Problem-Solving" philosophy, combined with Col.
John Boyd's OODA Loop theories results in addressing the
real world needs of officers. This system is predicated upon the revolutionary "Universal Laws & Principles of Defense.©
This is the only program of its kind utilizing a “non-technical,
outcome-based” approach that is indeed applicable to every suspect
control or officer defense situation--officers don’t have to learn
specific “techniques” for specific attacks and hope to remember which
of the 300 or so “techniques” they learned two years ago to use. This
system of defense and control is based on the smallest and weakest
officer in the field, not the trained martial artist or jock
who also happens to be a cop.
 The
motto of the course was coined by a participant some time following
his attendance at a seminar to tell us how pleased he was with the
training. He said, “Fighting is hard enough without having to
remember how to fight when a suspect is trying to hurt you.”
© We think that sums up the program. There is little to
remember because there really are no “techniques.” Once the Universal
Laws & Principles of Defense© are learned, they are
applied regardless of the defense situation to effective problem-solve
any combatives problem. So far, we have had no
“what-if’s” in either training or, more importantly, in the field in
which the Universal Laws & Principles of Defense© don’t
apply. The beauty of this system is the common sense, non-technical,
problem-solving approach it takes to the entire question of peace
officers defending themselves in the real world.
We define any physical conflict as "a
series of mistakes corrected as you make them." Therefore, teaching
"techniques" cannot be calculated
to lead to success in the imperfect world of law enforcement and
corrections. Additionally, we cannot "control" any suspect except with
that person’s permission (he complies), or unless that person is too
injured to resist, or is unconscious, or we overwhelm him with body
weight. Therefore, we teach what we call the "Universal Laws &
Principles of Defense" to LE. There are 3 Universal Laws that are the
foundation of any combatives effort. Then there are 6 Universal
Principles that are employed whenever there is a tactical need.
While it may seem a lot to ask anyone
to "remember" 3 Laws and 6 Principles, the reality is that we looked
at what has made humans successful in close personal physical
conflicts since we became humans, and we found that we, as humans, all
knew these Universal Laws and Principles when we were kids, but then
had it trained out of us by "those who know such things"--e.g., DT and
martial arts instructors. As such, there is little to remember in our
system, and it is based on simplicity, simplicity, simplicity—we just
have to get out of our own way and allow our bodies to work. Our
shared reality is this…put two 3-year olds in a sandbox with one toy
truck. Both grab for it at the same time. As soon as the 3-year old
who wants it the most (Universal Law: The desire to win is paramount
in any fighting situation), he pulls it to his chest (Universal
Principle: Suspect body parts to officer body mass, or
"closer/stronger") and says, "Mine!" (See above Universal Law) and
then spins hard to yank it away from the other kid (Universal
Principle: Always move in angles and circles).
A "properly trained" police recruit,
given the same situation, would attempt a figure-eight wrist restraint
with a 30 degree inverted diving/extended hold while using Verbal Judo
and calling for backup on their radio. The result? The three-year old
rips the toy truck out of the police recruit’s hands and the recruit
resorts to schoolyard tactics of jumping the kid and holding him down
until sufficient backup arrives to assist with recovering the toy
truck. Techniques fail…and generally work only on other police
officers in training. This results in schoolyard solutions that are
sometimes difficult to justify and cannot be, in any way, said to be
"trained."
We teach a system of defense
countermeasures that actually teaches officers to overcome the
resistance of a suspect through "problem-solving"—just like cops do in
the real world. Skilled guys like you have likely done take downs into
a cuffing position of a resisting suspect who still wanted to
fight…but I have asked this question of every DT class I’ve ever
taught, and rarely more than one guy in the class ever says they have
successfully done this—and the honest ones say they’ve only done it
once or twice out of dozens or even hundreds of takedowns. I ask if
anyone has ever held anyone who was fresh (not already injured or
winded from a fight) who didn’t want to be restrained in a wrist
restraint hold or limb restraint. It is extremely rare to find anyone
who has been successful in applying these "techniques" in the field
against someone who doesn’t want to play along with the nice officers.
So my question to my instructor classes is, "Why are we wasting
valuable and potentially life-saving time teaching stuff that the
average officer will NEVER use?
So we teach problem-solving, just like
a real cop must do in a real fight. It works for either a high or low
intensity situations where the offender is not cooperative and the
officer must win. Each component of the arrest or defense against
assault is a problem that simply needs to be solved. It addresses the
reality that officers confront in every resistive or assaultive
arrest.
We
prepare you and your officers by utilizing drills that deeply embed
and condition a "Threat Recognition Response.©"
All physical assault on officers are foreshadowed by threat cues by
the suspect. Recognizing these warning signs early and
responding to them effectively is the key to surviving. These
specialized drills, found no where else, quickly provides you with the
skills to quickly recognize a developing threat, with the physical
skills and decision-making processes to problem-solve a solution to
any defense need.
So there it is in a nutshell.
Fighting, whether police or civilian or military is about "solving
combative problems." This is why we call it "real-world." We have
never found another system that looks at fighting from the intrinsic
knowledge of humans in a problem-solving context. A few other systems
touch on this, but then they always revert back to either a technical
solution or simply teach to "punch the suspect out." We know this
isn't a brawl or a street fight--although it can be a high
intensity, last-ditch defense of life. Our program does involve some
strikes, but they are always directed to gain compliance or advantage
in order to get the subject to the ground and then into custody
utilizing reasonable and defensible methods.
It is
also compatible with whatever your present system is, and does not
require “de-training” officers. Training time to competence is
dramatically shortened—officers can be better trained in less time
(the idea that officers can be trained to be competent in Aikido or
jujitsu or wrestling in 40-80 hours is ludicrous).
What we have found is that officers naturally use those skills that
are comfortable for them when an actual defense situation develops.
By offering this system of non-technical defense, officers tend to use these skills
to resolve the situation because they are simple and practical.
Nothing trained in this system can be inherently outside the scope of
your agency policy because its basis is the reasonable (and, in some
states, necessary)
use of force per Graham and your state law. This system has
been called “The Toolbox.” While defensive tactics training has
generally provided some tools, there has been no universal system that
puts it all together. This is the system that your officers have been
asking for all along. They just didn’t know where to find it. Now
it’s available for them.
“Fighting is hard enough without having to
remember how to fight when a suspect is trying to hurt you.”
© |
