[bill-karn]

We’ve just added a THIRD day of training with Londale:

DAY 3: Long Gun Retention and Defenses/Disarms

Long gun (rifle & shotgun) training will be held on Thursday, October 5, 2006 from 0800-1600 at the Training Edge. As we’ve done before, you can sign up for any one, two or all three days of seminars. Pre-registration is encouraged. See post above for more info.

Hope to see you there!

[bill-karn]

KM Force Training DOES teach weapon retention for handgun out of the holster – live side, dead side, from the front and also on the ground (mount and guard). I’m don’t know if they still teach it in the basic instructor course anymore, but I’m pretty sure it’s still taught in some of the courses.

[bill-karn]

Fitnesstrainer,

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.

[bill-karn]

Kirsten,

Thanks for your good points and support. I guess when you’re in the \”minority\”, you have to stick together. 😉
Take care.

Ryan,

\”I’ll just say this, I don’t need whatever perceived \”credibility\” this supposedly carries\”

OK, then why do it? Why got to LA and spend the time, money and effort to get certified? And why post your KMFT certification on your website?

If you did it to benefit your local LEOs, that’s great. But why not just offer a discount to LEOs for regular KM training at your school? Or offer your facilities to local LE agencies to do their own in-service DT training? Or send one of your more talented students/instructors who are active LE (most KM schools have several who are attracted to the nature of the training – I don’t know if your’s does) to become KMFT certified? Or the other methods I mentioned previously, like working with current LE DT instructors to improve their existing programs?

Obviously, you are a businessman and have to run your school the way you see fit, and I wouldn’t tell you how to run your business. But I think all those options above are better than allowing civilian KMFT instructors to teach the LE program. I’ve attended LE seminars with Darren, but all that he taught was weapons defenses and other stuff that is taught to high level civilian classes. He never taught any weapon retention, handcuffing, arrest & control or use of force escalation/de-escalation nor did he pretend to be an expert at things that he wasn’t familiar with.

I guess my bottom-line question that nobody seems to answer is, WHY did the KMFT system change to start allowing certification of civilian instructors?

Was there a shortage of certified instructors? I know Londale and some of the other senior instructors are willing to travel, and have travelled, across the country to run Instructor Certification classes and LE seminars. Hell, we’ve got around 30 certified KMFT instructors available in Western NY that were certified in at least one of the Series through the Training Edge in the past. And I’d be honored to instruct a training class with any of them.

Or were there some incredible skills that only \”select\” civilian instructors had that the KMFT program was in need of? I don’t think so. As I stated before, I respect the abilities of all the civilian instructors, but I don’t think the program was lacking for their absence. Many of the KM LE instructors are very skilled. And what better way to sell the simplicity and ease to learn/use of the system than by having one of your own LE brothers or sisters that you work with everyday perform it and teach it? As both Kirsten and I both stated, having civilian instructors trying to teach experienced street cops and veteran C.O.s does dramatically decrease the program’s credibility and acceptance level among those its supposed to be helping.

So, again, if the change to allow civilian certification was not needed, why do it? The only reason I’ve heard, and I don’t know if it’s true or not, is that other \”Israeli\” or \”military-style\” self-defense systems were offering civilians certifications to instruct their law enforcement programs and that KMWW did not want to lose schools or potential business by not allowing civilians to instruct KMFT. If there is another reason, I’d like to hear it.

[bill-karn]

Re:

quote \”Ryan\:

\”
Um, I don’t know about in Buffalo, but around here, if you’re looking to make money from LEOs or their departments, you’re in trouble.\”

Fair enough, maybe I should have been clearer. While I agree there’s not a ton of money to be made from LEOs or their agencies, there is an amount of prestige attached to such certification and that does draw a certain number of civilians who want to train where the law enforcement guys train. I’ve been told as much by many civilians over the years.

\”The military hires civilian contractors for H2H all the time. I don’t see this much differently. The standards have not been lowered, and the group is select.

Well, civilians instructing military in H2H ONLY is different than a civilian trying to train me in handcuffing, arrest & control, weapon retention, etc. It’s apples and oranges. Chances are the civilian instructor has extensive experience in striking/grappling/fighting, probably much more than the average individual officer. Just like in the past when our Department SWAT team has trained with the Army’s 10th Mountain Division in dynamic building entries – those guys do it everyday and we learned a great deal.

But that is NOT the case when you’re certifying somebody to teach arrest & control, weapon retention or several other topics in the LE curriculum. Have any of those civilian instructors (unless they’re former LE, which I don’t have a problem with) EVER handcuffed someone outside of training in the dojo? I do it everyday and know what the problems/issues are and have experienced them firsthand. Or how about having somebody try to grab your sidearm from your gunbelt? Or worried about use of force issues and how to justify use of force when writing their reports? Other issues that almost all civilian instructors have no experience with, yet they are ones that many LE officers have had to deal with and are concerned about. I don’t care how \”select\” they are, to me, civilian instructors lack credibility when they’re certified to instruct the whole Force Training system.

[bill-karn]

Fightin Irish, if you have not done so already, please check out our monthly Krav Maga law enforcement training class at the Training Edge in Williamsville. I think you’ll find it far more practical and reality-based than what you were taught at the academy…

I agree that most of my police academy DT training was focused on liabilty and stuff that MIGHT work against a \”maybe\” person or a difficult drunk (escort holds and pain compliance) verus what you need when someone is actively resisting or fighting with you. Part of the problem is that many of the DT instructors out there are traditional MA guys and the stuff they know/teach doesn’t necessarily carry over well to the street. Something like basic groundfighting is totally foreign to most of them, but is really useful to the average street cop or corrections officer, as most of our physical confrontations end up on the ground. In New York, the State DCJS has mandated at least three hours of groundfighting training in the police academies to be certified, which is a good thing, but then it comes down to who is teaching it and what they’re teaching…

I think the KM force training system is the best out there that I’ve seen, based mainly on the practicality, reliance on instinctive movements and the number of easy to perform techniques/principles that cover multiple scenarios. As Londale says, \”Less is more\”, and that is so true. Especially when you don’t have a lot of time to train your people. Teaching somebody the best techniques in the world is pointless if they’re not going to retain them.

One problem I do have with the KM system is the relatively new move to allow civilians to become certified KM law enforcement instructors. I think one of things that gave the system credibility and won it acceptance among many LE personnel was the fact that the instructors were all current or former LE officers themselves. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure there are many civilian instructors out there who could teach how to punch, kick, groundfight, etc. more than adaquately and I’m not trying to disrespect them or their skills. But how many of those people have had to fight with and handcuff a drunk at 4a.m. with no backup around? Unless you’ve actually done it, you lack credibility trying to teach cops how to do it better.
It’s not \”the same\” because you’ve been in some street fights, or worked as a bouncer or even if you’ve been a pro fighter.

Topics like arrest & control, weapon retention and escalation of force are not on the mind of most civilian martial arts instructors, but they are things many LE personnel are dealing with and thinking about every day. I think that shared similar job experiences allow for more open and valuable training because the instructor can personally relate to both what he or she is teaching and to any questions or \”what if\” scenarios. Unless you wear a gun belt to work everyday and carry around a sidearm, pepper spray, baton, handcuffs, etc. it’s pretty hard to relate to the mentality that every confrontation you are involved in is a potential gunfight and the necessity to escalate or de-escalate the amount and level of force used based on the circumstances.

While I think it’s great that civilian MA instructors want to teach LE personnel DT techniques to better keep them safe, I think such efforts are better handled through encouraging individual LE personnel to take civilian classes to supplement their training or by having the civilian experts assist LE DT instructors in developing a more practical and realistic DT training program for officers. Certifying civilian instuctors to teach LE personnel things like handcuffing and weapon retention will only weaken the credibility of and respect for the KM Force Training system among the law enforcement community. It smacks of chasing the money of civilian schools who might otherwise go to another system that will certfify them as law enforcement trainers (in order to attract more LE students) rather than keeping the original KMFT \”law enforcement only\” standard.

[bill-karn]

yayamac,

It’s really up to you as you can go either route. Civilian Krav is very similar to what we teach our law enforcement people, minus the law enforcement specific stuff such as takedowns, arrest & control and weapon retention. Ideally, you could take both as your proficiency with civilian training would only help you with the law enforcement techniques when you trained in those.

In LE training we also get to things like weapon defenses much quicker than they do in civilian training because that is what our LE people need for the street. If you only train on the civilian side then you usually don’t see those techniques for some time into your training. So, if you have the time, I would suggest training in both programs to get both proficient at basic techniques plus training in some of the more advanced techniques that are very relevant to law enforcement personnel.

Just be aware that to do the LE training, you must be a sworn peace/police officer.

Hope that helps you.

Thanks,

[Author]

Posts