Kneeling on the neck?

[Bob Hubbard]

Thank you.
My intent on posting this here wasn't to generate a "bad cop" discussion, but discuss the validity and safety of this particular method. We've had a few people in the past come through here with various bugs up their asses towards cops, and our intent in setting this section up was to avoid it. We don't ask that you all hold hands and sing songs together, but there is an insistance of respect.

For some additional info on the situation the OP photo came from, see this thread, around post 21.
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1063840

 

[Archangel M]

My point was that too many do go beyond where they are allowed to go. The closer one gets to the inner city, the greater that number becomes.

Ever stop to think that perhaps that is due to a relationship between the police AND the clientele? What (and who) the police have to deal with in the "inner city" is different from the suburbs. It doesnt excuse improper use of force, but the cop who acts like officer friendly in the projects is going to get his *** handed to him.

Not a PC answer perhaps, but the truth as I see it.

 

[MJS]

Actually I was editing that to try to avoid being explicit at the same time the reply was posted. However, if you want to get into a discussion about racial inequity in policing, I'd be happy to post studies and reports on that point as well.

I don't disagree that there are far more good cops than bad. My point was that too many do go beyond where they are allowed to go. The closer one gets to the inner city, the greater that number becomes.

I know that from personal experience, but as I've been asked to not discuss this topic here as it both violates the forum rules of "don't criticize us," as well as being outside of the scope of this thread's intent, I'll stop as asked.

AFAIK, I don't believe anyone told you not to talk about the subject. Here is the difference. If I'm debating with someone and I disagree with them, and I turn around and start swearing at them, calling them stupid, etc., vs. being civil and staying with the rules of the forum...well, thats the difference. If I run around and have the attitude that all cops suck, vs. avoiding that 'tone' in my posts...well, thats the difference in a nutshell. If studies that are non bias are used as example, vs. ones that are written by people that have a chip on their shoulder, well, thats the difference.

 

[MJS]

That is part of the problem when police use force. The public DOESN'T UNDERSTAND what we can or can't do!

AMEN!!! They see something, however, 9 times out of 10, they're seeing what THEY want to see, not the full picture.

In Rodney King, you saw a small video clip of the whole encounter. There was a reason that the officers were found NOT GUILTY of excessive force in the initial trial, although the jury was deadlocked on one count for Powell. Let's look at the FACTS that were presented at trial.

1) King was a known felon, who the police had dealt with in the past.
2) King was on parole for a violent crime (robbery)
3) King was TWICE the legal limit of alcohol and RAN FROM THE POLICE, a pursuit followed.
4) The two people in the car with King, complied with the police and were taken into custody without any issue (read--They listened to what they were told)
5) King gets out of the car acting bizarre like he was on drugs.
6) King is shocked with a stun gun and does not go down
7) King resists officers and throws two of them off his back as they tried to wrestle him to the ground. (due to his behavior previously and with this, officers believe King was on PCP)
8) King starts to go after another officer, who then struck him with his baton.
9) Officers try to use their batons to subdue King, who REPEATEDLY attempts to get back up and continues to resist.

I have to wonder how much of this was made public. Perhaps if the public knew any of this, well, I think you know what I'm saying.

At the time of the incident, LAPD's "Use of Force" policy was under the heading of "Total Control Theory" which states that you use a tool for every level of force and vary it depending on the situation. This means that the tool (baton) was used in all uses of force. So what you have is, a violent offender who is believed to be high on PCP (which gives it users huge amounts of strength and no pain) lower levels of force have been defeated (H2H & stun gun), Also he keeps getting up when struck with a baton. Officers can't kill him yet, so what is their option? They keep using their intermediate weapon (Baton) to try and subdue the offender. What would YOU have done in that situation? It's easy to armchair quarterback and say they were wrong. But really, what would you have done?

Another great point!

Really? Come on now, most cops have audio and video now on them at all times. You're trying to tell us that people who don't resist at all get slammed on the hood of a car?

Thats true. I've seen many local PDs with dash cams, and I believe that is standard on every Ct. State Police car as well. Any time there was a need to use force in the DOC, such as taking someone out of their cell, one of the officers would have a camera, filiming the incident.

If a subject is actively resisting and demonstrates actions that put the officer in harm's way we are justified in punching them in the face. PPCT recommends going to the solar plexus, but the face is listed as a "secondary target". Now think about the stink that would cause if an officer does what he can do legally, but breaks the offender's nose and blood is all over. EVERYONE is going to scream "excessive force", even though it is within the proper scope.

"Excessive Force" is a VERY specific legal definition that defines what an officer can or can't do. How many of you outside of law enforcement have been trained in a use of force spectrum? Most LE (in America at least) uses what is called a "One Plus One" theory of control. Simply that means if the offender uses X level of force, we can use X+1 (or the next step HIGHER) to control them. We aren't required to use equal force, as a citizen does in a self-defense situation.

So back to the "kneeling on the neck". As others have stated, you aren't really kneeling on the neck itself but usually put pressure on the trap/upperback area.

Can't disagree with any of that. Great post! 2 thumbs up!!

 

[KP.]

If I'm debating with someone and I disagree with them, and I turn around and start swearing at them, calling them stupid, etc., vs. being civil and staying with the rules of the forum...well, thats the difference.

Care to show where I swore at someone or called someone stupid or was lacking in civility? The only place I came close to not being civil was noting that absolutes do not apply by using a rather curt colloquial phrase, not entirely different from when someone commented that a perfectly respectful post of mine was "a load of crap."

I will cop (sorry bad pun) to having violated the forum rules, and as I noted in my previous post am ceasing to address the topic here.

If I run around and have the attitude that all cops suck, vs. avoiding that 'tone' in my posts...well, thats the difference in a nutshell.

Again, care to show where I demonstrate such an attitude? I've been very careful to use modifiers such as "far too many" in this discussion. I would hope that the LEO's here would agree that one is too many.

If studies that are non bias are used as example, vs. ones that are written by people that have a chip on their shoulder, well, thats the difference.

Human Rights Watch is actually a fairly well regarded organization in terms of data collection and analysis.

But if you want scholarly articles, those are available in abundance as well.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q...en&lr=&client=firefox-a&scoring=r&as_ylo=2003

However, I would appreciate it if my involvement on this topic was allowed to come to an end. I was asked not to discuss this further here, and I would like to comply. That is rather difficult to do if I'm going to be addressed or made the topic of discussion.

 

[MJS]

Care to show where I swore at someone or called someone stupid or was lacking in civility? The only place I came close to not being civil was noting that absolutes do not apply by using a rather curt colloquial phrase, not entirely different from when someone commented that a perfectly respectful post of mine was "a load of crap."

I will cop (sorry bad pun) to having violated the forum rules, and as I noted in my previous post am ceasing to address the topic here.




Again, care to show where I demonstrate such an attitude? I've been very careful to use modifiers such as "far too many" in this discussion. I would hope that the LEO's here would agree that one is too many.



Human Rights Watch is actually a fairly well regarded organization in terms of data collection and analysis.

But if you want scholarly articles, those are available in abundance as well.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q...en&lr=&client=firefox-a&scoring=r&as_ylo=2003

However, I would appreciate it if my involvement on this topic was allowed to come to an end. I was asked not to discuss this further here, and I would like to comply. That is rather difficult to do if I'm going to be addressed or made the topic of discussion.

You know what, you're right, this is off topic, however, I'm going to address this last post. I was simply using the above as examples. The forum rules are pretty clear. There are many options for people to use if they have a question on something, ie: post in member support areas, PM a mod or Admin. What I am not doing is spelling things out for people. If people can't figure out by their own wording in a post, how it sounds, well, I don't know what to tell them.

I don't believe I nor anyone else said you could not post in this section. Just that you respect the rules for this section, one of them being not to bash LEOs.

On that note, lets get back to the discussion at hand.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Yes please. Back to the neck issue.

Thank you.

 

[Geeba12]

It is unfortunate to see a debate focused on a defensive tactics technique deteriorate into an "us against them", racist allegations of police vs civilians. My only comments regarding that is quite simply: law abiding citizens, abide by the law, criminals don't (and are quite often, especially if they are career criminals, more knowledgeable about the law than some fresh out of law school ADA's).
During my career I have seen and done many things, it is quite clear when reading these comments who have walked the walk and those that regurgitate what they are led to believe by others with questionable agenda's, to be the truth.
When I was a "New Jack" I recall an incident when my back up officer (he was black, I am white), was referred to as "brother" by a black suspect. My friend responded, without missing a beat: "My brothers are colored blue". Clearly an officer focused on "the law".
Back to the topic, kneeling on the neck works, it is one of those truths that cannot be denied. Do some officers use too much force in the heat of the moment? Yes, they are human beings and when the adrenalin runs high, that same adrenalin suspects use to assault officers, officers use to effect an arrest.
We will get nowhere mixing politics with police defensive tactics. When an officer is forced to use pain as a way to take a suspect into custody, injuries can occur. Unfortunate, yes, a fact of life, yes. The only other alternative is for the officer to have to "take his/her lumps" before using proper force. How ludicrous would that be?
Be safe all.

 

[Archangel M]

Thats why the Taser is so great...wait thats just a torture device overused by cops.

 

[Drac]

Thats why the Taser is so great...wait thats just a torture device overused by cops.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh..Keep that too yourself...

 

[Archangel M]

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh..Keep that too yourself...

Oooops! Sorry....ignore that last post folks, ya know blue wall of silence and all.

 

[shesulsa]

Note:

Again. Let's get back to the topic. If you want to discuss police conduct issues in general, please go to the thread in the Study. This thread is exploring the safety and efficacy of using the lower leg on the upper back and shoulder area.

Read the whole thread before posting and make sure your post coincides with the thread flow as it pertains to the original topic.

G Ketchmark / shesulsa
MT Assist. Administrator

 

[Archangel M]

Any use of physical force is a balance between efficiency and risk of injury. Guiding you by the arm is "physical force" that only works with your co-operation. The more you resist, the more force I have to use (or a tool like the Taser or OC), the more force I have to use the higher the risk gets. A person on his stomach is still a risk to the officer. He/She has to holster their weapon, get very close to the suspect and take them into custody. Officers have been killed at that moment. Control has to be maintained. The knee works and is an acceptable balance of force/control.

 

[Drac]

Oooops! Sorry....ignore that last post folks, ya know blue wall of silence and all.

What blue wall of silence????...All that stuff is on YouTube...Our department has the TazerCams so when the cracked up naked gang-banger waving a baseball bat shows up in court looking all GQ the Judge and Jury can see what we saw when the Tazer was applied...

 

[Bob Hubbard]

TaserCam......I now have this wicked idea for a website....damn, it's taken.

 

[Drac]

TaserCam......I now have this wicked idea for a website....damn, it's taken.

Sorry...

 

[sgtmac_46]

A discussion I'm following on another site had a photo of a LEO in riot gear handcuffing a prone individual, with a knee very clearly on the persons neck. Given my limited knowledge of arrest procedures, is this common or accepted? It seems dangerous to me.

Photo Link

(Note, not intending on a criticism of the act, etc, just looking for clarification on if it's accepted or discouraged, etc.)

His weight is not actually on the neck, but on the shoulders, and it's a common police practice. If the knee were on the actual neck, unstead on the weight bearing shoulders it would be improper positioning......but a close look at the picture will clearly show only the side of his knee is in contact with the arrested subjects neck, not the weight bearing bottom of the knee, which is clearly across the shoulders.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I think most people that have been through defensive tactics and hand cuffing classes will tell you that the knee in this position goes on or across the shoulder blades. In this picture that appears to be exactly what the officer is doing. Not fun or pleasant if you are the guy or girl on the bottom but definitely a good way to control a resisting individual. I cannot tell you how many times I have either used this technique in the past or watched someone use it. It is simply effective.

Exactly! And i'm betting the officer was in this position long enough to get the flex-cuffs secured, then he released the weight and got the guy to a standing position.

The shoulder blades can handle the weight, and I seriously doubt it was this guys full weight.....just enough to secure this guy on the ground for handcuffing.

I've also used this technique many, many, MANY times as well......with ZERO injuries ever received. When I do it, most of my weight is ACTUALLY on the balls of my feet, with me pushing down with my knees with just enough weight to keep the subject secured. I can see-saw my weight forward and backward over the fulcrum of my feet to increase and decrease the pressure.

It's a very controlled and measured response that only appears as though the officer has all their weight on the guy.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you're not as clueless as you're coming across with this post.

There a couple of possibilities here. One is that it's just BS artists spinning crap stories. (Google "shrine of the mall ninja" for a hilarious example.) Another is that stories have grown in the telling, as war stories tend to do. Yeah -- war stories do sometimes glorify the violence... It's kind of a "guy thing" though it's not at all limited to guys. And there's a gallows humor aspect... plus just plain relief at living through someone trying to fight you.

Many martial artists enjoy fighting -- but that doesn't mean they enjoy hurting someone. It's the same with cops...

EXACTLY!

Yeah, we tell war stories.....but recounting with a minor sense of glee how some armed robbery suspect, when cornered, decided to fight his way out and lost isn't the same as beating people for no reason.

There is no law against enjoying a job well done, if you do the job right!

It's like the football player who LOVES smashing in to other football players.....but does it only when it's legal in the game.......he doesn't take cheap shots.

There's no shame in a football player being proud of a good FAIR TACKLE that put another player out of a game! Cheap illegal shots, on the other hand, are nothing to be proud of.

 

[sgtmac_46]

And every once and a while though you get those guys that know the score and go "felony prone" without asking the moment you pull up.

Oh YEAH!

'I see we've been HERE before!'