Use of Force Techniques

The Scope of ‘Use of Force’ Techniques.

————–
Self Defense Tips For Women Click Here!
————–
In the business of use of force, only one principle is static for trainers, administrators, and criminal justice practitioners: the law. This “law” encompasses everything from federal use of force to administrative guidelines and use of force continuums. What is most often open to interpretation, however, is the use of force techniques that professionals should use in performing their duties under the color of law.

For many years, much “squabbling” has occurred in procuring the best model of success for achieving proficiency in armed and unarmed conflicts. With a lack of congruent defensive tactics and firearm programs at the academy level, and an ever-increasing field of commercial use of force systems, discerning a certain and appropriate use of force program for a department has become difficult.

More importantly, many programs have failed to recognize the basic principles that define and substantiate the use of force: control and self-defense.

In the quest for marketability, these principles have become clouded through techniques not applicable to the officer’s environment, a lack of situational training, and through unqualified use of force instructors. As a result, not only is the safety and security of the officers and the public in jeopardy, but administrators have a difficult time getting their prosecutors “on board” when it’s time to review use of force incidences that result in injuries and litigation.

Because most unarmed defensive tactics techniques, specifically, are based upon the martial arts, they were not originally designed for arresting suspects. Therefore, techniques must be field tested and modified for street and jail applications. Summarily, whether using the weaver or isosceles stance when firing a weapon or using a jujitsu move in subduing a suspect, two variables must be understood and trained for: control and self-defense. If trainers and administrators can clarify training objectives through this scope, then climbing the ladder of success becomes easier in using justifiable force.

As mentioned previously, use of force is a dynamic situation. Officers are constantly moving back and forth between control and self-defense. There is a very fine line when circumstances warrant both aspects within seconds of each other. Control can be defined as a degree of influence that an officer exerts over another in responding to a problem. Interestingly enough, officers must not only control the subject but themselves as well. Both self control and control of violators, as purveyors of successful outcomes, is developed by skills received through training and practice. The goal of subject control is to gain compliance or cooperation in effecting an arrest or other circumstances leading to a lawful detention.

Techniques and technologies in subject control baffle the everyday officer when definitive guidelines and application principles are not understood.

For example, many control techniques lead to pain responses if executed with subject resistance. Continuing or exceeding these responses are often problem areas for many officers in executing control techniques. Pepper sprays and non-lethal devices, which are functional and necessary, do not control individuals but subdue them and incapacitate them to the point that physical control can be established.
When considering control, one must consider physical control. While officers are never “out of the woods” in respect to potential attacks, a controlled violator is one who is no longer dominating the situation. Thus, restrained individuals are physically placed into restraint devices, physically removed from a premise and so forth.

Control should also be utilized with the element of surprise. Combining this element with affirmative and decisive application of the proper control technique will allow officers to control effectively and efficiently. Physical confrontations with subjects that rely on strength and stamina can be averted, reducing the chance of physical injury to the officer or subject.

Law enforcement officers are taught early in their careers that they must gain control over any situation they are called to.

Unfortunately, they are not provided with the tools to accomplish this task. Actions are based upon equipment and training.

Eliminating or not providing either not only increases the chances of injury or death but also increases the chances for negligent actions on the part of the law enforcement officer.

While pain compliance tools, for example, are effective, they are so in certain situations. They most often fail to work on intoxicated individuals. Furthermore, they are not designed to control but to serve as a distraction technique or as an application to be used in conjunction with a control measure.
————–
Self Defense Tips For Women Click Here!
————–
Several challenges currently face use of force trainers in respect to selling, establishing, and implementing control techniques and programs in their departments.

- First, good control techniques should be designed so that a single officer working alone can subdue and handcuff a violator.
- Secondly, technique should be a gross motor skill that is easy to learn, easy to use, and easy to remember.
- Third, officers must feel confident in the technique and their ability to perform with it.
- Last, control techniques should complement other training they have previously received.

If the departmental training staff and administrators can accomplish all of these variables, officers will receive quality use of force training and techniques and be able to reduce vicarious liability.

As the second principle of use of force, self-defense of “self-protection” carries significant implications in the dynamics of using force. An officer must be able to recognize and interpret a tense and evolving situation and make quick decisions regarding the magnitude of such event.

In other words, if an officer is not controlling or attempting to control a violator and is instead preparing to defend himself or others, they must decide the level of self-protection to employ. Is this merely a case of a simple deflection technique or must the officer draw his firearm and shoot?

The more skills that an officer can learn and retain will provide numerous options that can protect the officer and others. Why limit them?

Additionally, it is of integral importance for trainers and administrators to review their use of force incidences and research those areas of incident that require certain measures in protection. While a plethora of techniques in self-defense exist, it is the ultimate responsibility of the trainer and administrator to seek out and promote the best option for their agency and furthermore, not limit their department to necessarily one commercially available system.

Numerous control and self-defense systems exist in contemporary police use of force training programs. As mentioned previously, it is important for the trainer and administrator to choose those programs which have high retention rates and are applicable to all police encounters with combative subjects.

Any use of force training program should have the following elements:

Work in the real world
Reasonable amount of time to learn
Agency, courts, and local community must accept it
Training techniques must be integrated into patrol tactics
Legal parameters must be identified and understood
Basis of testing (documentation)

Of critical importance within any program is defining the premise for which the technique(s) are to be utilized. Outside of the general, large law enforcement and correctional settings, most departments are comprised of smaller city and sheriff’s offices throughout the country. These officers are often the only ones on duty and may not have the option of calling a backup officer. These lone officers are faced with the possibility of having to subdue, control, and handcuff a subject by themselves.

Considering this, it is imperative that these officers have training in techniques which are easy to learn, easy to employ and can be retained with minimum practice, and when utilized, will allow them to arrest, control and handcuff a subject by themselves.

© 2005 Forceology Research Group. All rights reserved. Brian A. Kinnaird, Ph.D. serves as department chair and professor of criminal justice studies at Fort Hays State University in Hays, KS. He is a former, full-time law enforcement officer and can be reached at bkinnair@fhsu.edu.

The 7 Most Effective Self Defense Techniques
A simple and effective guide to self defense for anyone of any shape or size that actually works!

————–
Self Defense Tips For Women Click Here!
————–