A question for those envolved in law/military jobs.

Posted by: Anonymous

A question for those envolved in law/military jobs. - 01/25/04 11:54 AM

What's you take on UFC style fighting. Fighting preferably on the ground. Sportative training and sport adapted moves to self-defense situations. Do you think they work, or do you think one should train differently for an actual self-defense situation.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: A question for those envolved in law/military jobs. - 01/26/04 07:08 PM

I work in retail loss prevention, not law enforcement. My goal during a struggle is restraint and detention. I cannot, because of corporate policy and laws, rely on striking. Therefore I must rely on grappling.I take the subject to ground,remaining standing or kneeling, and handcuff them.
My MA's training is a mix of aikido/karate/kung fu and a seperate BJJ class once a week. The sparring I do is more NHB type(strikes/takedowns,continues on ground,no rounds/no stopping until 5 minutes up or submission-then reset start again).I have found the BJJ and sparring are the most useful to me on the job.
A street situation would be totaly different.I would not be limited, meaning I could throw the right/left cross to the jaw,kick to the knees and groin and do the three stooges eye boink.

I believe MMA training would benefit any Martial artist seeking to improve or develop fighting ability-allows better pressure testing of what you can make work.

Ps. US army trains BJJ
Posted by: 3SIXO

Re: A question for those envolved in law/military jobs. - 01/26/04 10:05 PM

When I first started out in law enforcement I wanted to learn a martial art I decided on a mix of Karate jujitsu and I did a class of judo at another school (actually just wanted to learn jujitsu but this dojo integrated both) It was until I started working on the street that I realized how much I wind up grabbing and throwing then restraining people that made me reconsider studying karate at all. dont get me wrong I really like Karate but the time I have to train is only about 2-3times a week so now I am going to start BJJ although its a little expensive They cover striking but not as much as they do take downs and restraining I find myself on the ground alot but its the nature of my job and thats my experiance If I was able to trained like some of those ufc guys it would work very well for me and what I do.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: A question for those envolved in law/military jobs. - 01/29/04 12:21 PM

Thank fellows

Hey Neko does the retail store train you? Or did you study on your own?

Yep I am aware that the us army uses BJJ, I also know they train in Judo and Sambo.

UFC style sparring? Don't want to be caught stealing in your store.

[This message has been edited by Shotokan (edited 01-29-2004).]
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: A question for those envolved in law/military jobs. - 01/29/04 10:30 PM

No, my store does not train me. The only company approved training is a cheesy video on the proper way to use handcuffs.

I trained for a couple years as a teenager, then got back into it after a 14 year or so layoff.

All I have to say is this, No one I get my hands on ever gets away-only chance they have is to outrun me or produce a weapon(then I back off,wave to them and tell"I'm sorry, I thought you were someone else!")
Posted by: kman

Re: A question for those envolved in law/military jobs. - 02/05/04 01:31 PM

Shotokan, I work armed security in low income Hi-rises. I'm also in the national guard. (after an 11 yr stint on active duty) I've practiced BJJ as well as other martial arts. Got my 1st dan in hapkido while stationed in Korea. As for ground fighting in law enforcement or military,,I would say only if I have to! by that meaning that I was taken to ground by my opponet. Then I would be happy for my ground skills,,but I would seek to disengage, create distance and if at all possible get to my feet/employ a non lethal such as pepper spray. when I picture ground fighting with a perp two ugly things come to mind. 1. I'm working to submit him and he's feeling around on my duty belt for one of my weapons. 2. same scenario and here comes his freinds,,, my most efffective and safest place is on my feet. That having been said I agree with 3sixo,,fighting on the job involves a lot of grabbing, throwing and control holds. My background in hapkido and other training in judo and ju-jitsu have stood me well. As for military,,my guard unit simply doesnt have acess to the army h2h programs (maybe when we get activated for our trip to Iraq next year) and as Ive said elsewhere h2h in combat is an absolute last resort. Team work and weapons are the prefered method of dealing with close up and personal encounters. K-
Posted by: JKogas

Re: A question for those envolved in law/military jobs. - 02/08/04 07:36 AM

We train all three games, standup(free movement), clinch and ground. This is the same basic approach that any fighter preparing for an MMA fight uses, simply because the fight is allowed to morph into all ranges. The same exact way that fights in the street are allowed to.

This is clearly a more realistic approach than the majority of martial arts out there. We don't CARE about "style" or where our stuff "comes" from, only that it's practicable. We don't want to train in arts where we have to rely on our partners cooperating with us during the moves. This is because bad guys don't cooperate with us...so why should our partners?

If a "move" is so complicated that it takes cooperative energy and a long time to master, we don't want anything to do with it, because it's NOT going to be effective during the "fog of war". I think you'll agree.

One of my students is a police officer. He came to me because nowhere else was training being done in a realistic manner -- even within his own department.

He successfully relied upon the training while in the field on three separate occassions, within a period of a month and a half of time. Each time, he relied on the street boxing approach that we have and, the groundfighting/grappling as is taught within our gym. That is culled from Brazilian jiu-jitsu primarily. He handled himself easily each time.

This cop stands about 5'6" and weighs about 170 lbs.

Results speak for themselves.

By the way, the arts we draw from are also used by fighters within the UFC. The use them because they work. The strategy is different of course, but practicable methods tend to create more functional fighters than people who train with compliant partners ANY day of the week, or who "pretend" to train.

Common sense folks.


[This message has been edited by JKogas (edited 02-08-2004).]
Posted by: jdee2712

Re: A question for those envolved in law/military jobs. - 02/21/04 08:01 AM

I am a police officer in Scotland. I have been involved in martial arts since 1985 and have studied Kung Fu (1st degree black sash), Muay Thai (1st degree red armband) and Judo (green belt). From my experience Judo has been the most beneficial to me in my professional capacity and although I studied the other arts for a longer period, I have only ever used Judo techniques in any arrests or restraints. Many of the Officer safety techniques we are taught come straight from Judo/ Ju Jitsu. Also it would be very hard for me to stand up in court and justify striking an arrested person (unless the were extremely violent and there had been a threat to life). I would also have to show that what action I took was absolutely necessary and not cruel in excess. So with this in mind, restraint as opposed to striking techniques prove to be far more effective (in 95% of incidents). I would like to stress that the reaction is usually dictated by the actions of the offender and striking techniques may well be the best choice at that particular time.