November 10, 2005 at 6:30 pm #41529onenessMember
I find this kind of funny…
On the general forum, everybody is arguing why KMWW has the right to trademark kravmaga, because they want to protect it! Does that not become the same for the Force Training Divison. Just because some people were in the IDF or had some percieved blessing, doesn’t mean they should be able to teach kravmaga in the US or Canada. If they want to teach bad enough then get certified through KMWW. It just that simple.
If KMWW was worried about protecting their credibilty and intellectual properties, then civilians should not be able to go through the FTD course, until they have LE experience. Its just that simple,aas well.
\” They were approached by DT instructors, and they were asked for opinions on self defense, weapon defenses, combatives, etc. Now, does it not behoove that instructor (and subsequently his students) to know as much about the goals and limitations of those he’s teaching? Does it not make sense for them to have a better understanding of use of force, subject control, handcuffing, searching procedures, weapon retention, etc.? This allows the instructor to keep the offerings much more relevant.\”
If you or anyone else really wanted to understand and make your offerings more relevnt then you would become at least a certified reserve officer. I did, for two years. That is what was stated to me by KMWW, in order to teach and go through the FTD. You had to be at least a reserve officer. Just going through the FTD teachings is not necessarily going to give you the knowledge you are seeking. In order to truly understand, you have to walk in their shoes.
Can you teach?, yes nobody is implying that you or anyone else can’t. Also, if you have been through the civilian phase training, then you can easily pass the FTD courses and learn what they have to teach. Can you then teach something that may save an officers life? yes. None of these things are the issue, yet some of you are trying to make them that! The problem is that you will never truly understand their job and decision making until you are in uniform and on the road.
Bickering on why, you have the right and that their is no evil intentions does not make you right. If you want to teach LE then teach them with the knowledge you have, currently. Do not go through the FTD and then imply you understand what is happening on their job because you were taught in a classroom setting that you know how to handcuff, search a suspect, and arrest and control.
just my two cents…November 11, 2005 at 3:04 am #41571ryanMember
\”Do not go through the FTD and then imply you understand what is happening on their job because you were taught in a classroom setting that you know how to handcuff, search a suspect, and arrest and control.\”
Please show me where I implied such a thing. I even made a point to say civilian instructors should be sure to not come off as wannabes (I also said that I don’t even teach these things.)
Whatever, you have your opinion, I have mine (and mine apparently corresponds with KMAA.) Major portions of KM will be added in the coming months to the NC BLET curriculum, as the result of a civilian instructor diligently working with open-minded and progressive thinking DT instructors. Argue all you want, but LEOs will benefit greatly from these changes, and they wouldn’t have come otherwise.November 11, 2005 at 2:24 pm #41583fitnesstrainerMember
I am new to this forum and have only posted a couple of times. I am an 18+ year LE veteran and current full-time LE trainer. I am not a belt holder nor a competitor. My interest in any DT curriculum or martial art is very simple…what can I learn that will: 1) make me a more tactically sound officer, and 2) is this knowledge/skill relevant and applicable to the job? In other words, is it something that I can teach to my students in a short period of time giving them at least a basic level of proficiency in street DT skills? I do not care where or from whom this is provided, as long as it is relevant, and the instuctors are quality and reputable.
In my capacity as the School Director for the Subject Control training curriculum for the NC Basic LE Training (BLET) program, I have to ensure that course curricula are job-related and applicable, reflect current information and practices, and employ appropriate performance-based training methods. Further, I facilitate on-going curriculum revision committees responsible for making needed changes in course curriculum based on findings and reports from the field, and for making presentations on needed changes and/or additions to the programs. This is a responsibility that I take very seriously (as should any trainer).
Now, how is this relevant to this discussion? I can say (in my experience) that the NC Justice Academy has hosted many training seminars in the DT area with trainers w/o a day of LE experience. Without exception, every single one of them were top professionals in their art and well respected in the LE community. None ever made any claim to understanding what the cop’s job is really like, nor acted like \”wannabe’s.\” They were all very attentive to our inputs and suggestions on DT techniques…this usually was in the form of us saying, \”this is a common situation, do you have something that we could learn to better respond?\” And, \”is there a better way for us to do this?\”
I’m not for one second saying that ANY non-LE trainer should be allowed to teach the LE community, any more than I’m saying that EVERY LE DT trainer is top-quality. I believe that this should be carefully considered and approved on a case-by-case basis, as in any employment contract. It’s no secret that LE departments don’t have a lot to spend when it comes to $$$ for training…we also know that when budgets are tight, sometimes training is cut down. Having that in mind, I think it is even more important than ever that we in this profession use our resources wisely! LE training in years past has been very \”clique-ish\” and narrow…its time for that philosophy to GO AWAY! If I know of a non-LE trainer who has a certain kind of expertise that I think will benefit NC BLET and in-service training in general, I will continue to take necessary steps to try to provide this information to all. These techniques must be reviewed by the Subject Control Curriculum Revision Committee. If approved by the committee, they must be approved by the NC BLET Revision Committee. If approved here, they must then go to the state Training Standards Commission for final approval. In other words, this is not a \”one-man show,\” but a collaborative effort from many experienced professionals and careful decision-making.
All of these committees are much less concerned with who taught the techniques initially, or what martial art they came from, than they are with the relevance to NC LEO’s. We have enough problems in this profession…let’s not make quality training one of them.
John CombsNovember 12, 2005 at 3:28 pm #41649ffdoMember
If the instructor has taken the time to understand the LEOs needs I have no problem learning from one that is not a LEO. If the technique is applicable then it is a good technique.
Budgets and getting rich….. We do our DT on our own time. The instructors are voulunteers also working on their own time. The basic certifications were paid for by the union becuase we thought it importent that we keep the basic sills we learned in training and get some advanced training. Our training weapons are often dart and water pistols bought at wal mart. None the less, those officers that want to better themselves have made it work.
JCNovember 12, 2005 at 7:41 pm #41653bill-karnMember
If you read all the above posts, I think you’ll see that nobody ever suggested that bringing in knowledgeable civilian instructors to help develop or improve your DT program was a bad idea. I certainly did not express that point of view. In fact, I think its a great idea and suggested it as a way to bring in new ideas and more realistic techniques to LE training.
For example, I’m sure most agency or academy DT instructors would love to have access to one of the Gracies to assist them in coming up with better techniques for LEOs to use for groundfighting (I know I would). Their competition and real-world experience would be incredibly valuable in determining what really works for those situations.
But how many LE agencies would feel comfortable having one of the Gracies teach the agency’s entire DT program, after say a week of training that person in handcuffing, weapon retention and arrest & control? I would hazard a guess that most of them would not. After all, what would
that Gracie know about things like legal and justifiable use of force, what really happens when attempting to control/handcuff a resisting subject, weapon retention, and possible escalation to higher force options: officer use of pepper spray, baton,handgun, shotgun, etc… How could he possibly relate to questions on those topics when he has little or no understanding of them?
This is almost exactly the scenario presented when KMAA started certifying
its civilian instructors to teach the KMFT program. I’m not debating their skills, teaching ability, integrity or motives (although some of those could be an issue). What I am debating is WHY it was done, and whether it was necessary and/or wise.November 14, 2005 at 3:36 pm #41672ryanMember
\”But how many LE agencies would feel comfortable having one of the Gracies teach the agency’s entire DT program, after say a week of training that person in handcuffing, weapon retention and arrest & control?\”
Where is that happening, and who is suggesting that it should? I think giant leaps are being made here.
Bill, could you address my previous post? I’m actually curious to hear your opinions.
FYI, I met with the NC SC/AT committee this past weekend, and they unanimously voted to include some KM techniques into the BLET curriculum. Furthermore, most are interested in receiving KM LE certs of their own. When I was asked about retention, I told them I didn’t mind talking about principles and ideas, but that I really didn’t want to \”teach\” it. I told them I would prefer to put them in contact with Pascal. This is the way I’ve always handled such inquiries, so, again, I fail to understand the vehement opposition to this training and cert. If you believe in KM as a system, then you have to believe that, at least in this case, lives may be saved as a result of cooperation between civilian instructors and DTs.November 14, 2005 at 5:47 pm #41680roMember
Here in Ky. we were able to get KLEC certification for Krav Maga and I have hosted 2 courses to certify select LEO’s from State and Local Police. I went through the first course – taught by Darren and assisted in areas I have had previous training (certification) in. During these courses I trained with and have helped train these officers. All of them know I am a civilian and they appreciate the fact that I offer my facility and time to help them (sorry for the cliche) stay safe. They welcome getting more \”tools for their tool box\” I am not, as a LE instructor, running the entire defensive tactics program. Occassionally, we will teach a class, on an official basis, specific techniques that they know I am more than qualified to teach, nothing more. Additionally, the other instructors that work with me ARE LEO’s, and they are usually there with me when we run a LE course.
Before I had the LE certification we had lots of Police Officers training in the civilian classes. Even though this training is not geared specifically for LE, I think that the offficers participating know when the techniques that we show them are applicable in a Law Enforcement situation and when it is not. It’s no different than when they train in other styles such as BJJ.November 17, 2005 at 4:25 pm #41743fitnesstrainerMember
My post was not directed specifically toward you or anyone else who has posted thus far. Just adding my own views to the discussion to shed some light, so-to-speak on this seemingly very controversial topic.
I actually agree with much of what you have posted on this topic in that I myself don’t think its a good idea to have a non-LE person come in and try to teach police tactics, force option selection, etc., because that person may not understand the law enforcement application of reasonableness, perception, totality of the circumstances, Graham v. Connor, and so on. Having said that, I look at this issue the same way that I look at health/fitness applications for LE. When I am designing fitness programs for my courses – for example, speed and power development, I often look to outside sources such as the American College of Sports Medicine, the Nat’l Strength & Conditioning Assoc., etc., for ideas, techniques, and research. The main reason for this is that there are precious few programs specifically geared for LE so, rather than try to reinvent the wheel, I will look to college and pro sport programs for ideas on periodization of training and plyometrics and \”tweak\” the techniques to fit LE training. I try to take the best ideas from many different areas and make them relevant to our trainees….same with DT tactics.
As in fitness, though I don’t believe in non-LE trainers teaching certain aspects of our job, I do believe in finding the best systems, techniques, and training methods – regardless of the source – and putting together the most comprehensive well-rounded force training program possible.
\”Grappling may be your thing, but blunt trauma is king.\”
– – Ron DonvitoOctober 11, 2006 at 4:31 pm #50296starallMember
Defensive Tactics…my two cents worth
I have attended various LE training for the past 15 years. I have been a PPCT Instructor, KRAV LE Inst., and am currently certified DAAT, Taser, and SPEAR instructor for our Dept. I am always looking at systems for training to see what each one offers. There are certain things I see in each training seminar that I can see working and some things that don’t. All you have to do is see the things that work on the street and things that don’t to make that evaluation.
It is my belief that you must develop your \”whole\” self for this job. That is a hard thing to do. You must be in good physical condition and KRAV can do that for you. The conditioning that Londale put us through when I went through the course was awesome. But you need to stay with it and practice it when all is said and done.
Mental conditioning comes along with being in good physical condition and understanding that you can \”hold your own\” while training. That can give you the edge when it comes to street confrontations.
Then there is that psych condition where you simply \”Know\” that you can handle yourself against the other guy/girl. You have trained to be physically fit, you have learned all the techniques in various training seminars, you have practiced those techniques and discarded the ones that don’t make sense, and now develop that confidence on the street. That is so important because you will first rely on your presence (body language communicates more than verbal) and then try de-escalate things verbally. Having confidence in yourself and your tools will not only allow yourself to realize that you can control the bad guy if needed, but will also allow you to rely on de-escalation skills to keep it from getting to a physical confrontation.
Fights on the street differ from all training. There are no rules and Big John won’t be there to call it off when shit hits the fan. Remember that scenario dictates what level of force you use and not the specific attack. (Ex. Man executes a front choke/push on the street is a whole lot different than a man executing a front choke/push on a bridge 120 feet above water. The attack is the same but the scenario differs. Kick to the A-frame and punch to the face may help you in that first scenario but a .40 cal round might have to come into play in the 2nd scenario.)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.