Police MMA - Has anyone tried to modify MMA to make it more applicable to police?

[Hawk79]

Hi there, I was wondering:

Are there any MMA fighters with law enforcement backgrounds that have found aspects of MMA to be useful in their day to day work? Alternatively, are there any MMA fighters here who think certain aspects of MMA would be especially useful in a law enforcement context?

MMA is obviously very useful for winning fights. But law enforcement officers often need to arrest people who are only passively resisting or actively resisting (struggling) but not attempting to injure the officer. This limits what an officer can do in response - you cannot knock someone out just because they won't let you handcuff them for example.

I am aware of Gracie Survival Tactics (Jiu Jitsu modified for police officers) but I am just wondering if there are any aspects of MMA that might also be applicable.

One benefit of MMA would be regular practice of distance management. Police are trained to maintain a certain distance from a suspect where possible but they are not getting regular practice at this important skill.

 

[drop bear]

There are elements of MMA that are useful for law enforcement over BJJ because they manage punching better.

Also they do sparring which is quite simply the act of dominating someone without crippling them.

And if you are law enforcement. The mechanics of MMA are good. If you want to try to control a guy without kicking his head off. You can. If he doesn't want to do that back to you. Well. You will find out how well you do at that.

Otherwise there are a lot of great weapons defence concepts in MMA. In that controlling punches is also about controlling arms.

 

[Hawk79]

There are elements of MMA that are useful for law enforcement over BJJ because they manage punching better.

Also they do sparring which is quite simply the act of dominating someone without crippling them.

And if you are law enforcement. The mechanics of MMA are good. If you want to try to control a guy without kicking his head off. You can. If he doesn't want to do that back to you. Well. You will find out how well you do at that.

Otherwise there are a lot of great weapons defence concepts in MMA. In that controlling punches is also about controlling arms.

Thanks for your reply. What tactics/techniques would you prioritise for law enforcement training?

 

[Mider]

The Gracie’s and others teach cops, look up BJJ Cops

 

[Hawk79]

The Gracie’s and others teach cops, look up BJJ Cops

Yea, i'm familiar with their Gracie Survival tactics. I was just wondering if there are others who have tried to adjust MMA (not just Jiu Jitsu) for police work.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Hi there, I was wondering:

Are there any MMA fighters with law enforcement backgrounds that have found aspects of MMA to be useful in their day to day work? Alternatively, are there any MMA fighters here who think certain aspects of MMA would be especially useful in a law enforcement context?

MMA is obviously very useful for winning fights. But law enforcement officers often need to arrest people who are only passively resisting or actively resisting (struggling) but not attempting to injure the officer. This limits what an officer can do in response - you cannot knock someone out just because they won't let you handcuff them for example.

I am aware of Gracie Survival Tactics (Jiu Jitsu modified for police officers) but I am just wondering if there are any aspects of MMA that might also be applicable.

One benefit of MMA would be regular practice of distance management. Police are trained to maintain a certain distance from a suspect where possible but they are not getting regular practice at this important skill.

I suspect you haven't worked in law enforcement. I'm not trying to belittle you, but your basic premise is flawed.

For one thing, it's not a fair fight. It's not supposed to be. Resist being handcuffed, discover a world of pain compliance techniques, none of which would be permitted in any mma match.

 

[Mider]

Yea, i'm familiar with their Gracie Survival tactics. I was just wondering if there are others who have tried to adjust MMA (not just Jiu Jitsu) for police work.

The Dog Brothers

 

[jks9199]

Yea, i'm familiar with their Gracie Survival tactics. I was just wondering if there are others who have tried to adjust MMA (not just Jiu Jitsu) for police work.

Yes, there have been.

See, every few years, a bright new idea comes along, and takes the defensive tactics/control tactics by storm. Many years ago, it was judo and aikido. A few years back, krav maga was big. Along the way, BJJ came in, and so have MMA techniques. It's a combination of marketing, and of folks trying to make their own mark...

Here's the truth -- Cops need a principles based approach that can be taught quickly, retained well, scaled in practice, justified legally in both the civil and criminal standards... Why principle based? Because principles can be learned and used more flexibly than rote techniques. Why taught quickly and retained well? Because there's never enough time for real training, either in the academy or in-service. Why must it be scalable? Because the police officer has to adjust the use of force to the resistance encountered dynamically throughout the encounter. Why legally justifiable? Because the cops are bound by the law...

 

[drop bear]

Thanks for your reply. What tactics/techniques would you prioritise for law enforcement training?

This two on one russian stuff is basically the business for restraining guys or addressing weapons. And it is a pathway to back takes duck unders and takedowns. And it can be trained with resistance. And because it comes off the clinch it is an anti striking option as well.

 

[drop bear]

Standing guard passes.

And this is more BJJ in the video. In MMA you posture differently to avoid up kicks.

 

[Hawk79]

I suspect you haven't worked in law enforcement. I'm not trying to belittle you, but your basic premise is flawed.

For one thing, it's not a fair fight. It's not supposed to be. Resist being handcuffed, discover a world of pain compliance techniques, none of which would be permitted in any mma match.

I'm not offended. Thanks for your response. I'm not in law enforcement and I don't plan to be. I'm just really interested in police defensive tactics and improving this aspect of policing. One day it would be cool if I could teach modified Jiu Jitsu (Like Gracie Survival Tactics) to Police just as part of a free class outside their work hours (not formally connected to the police).

I became interested in police defensive tactics when I studied a type of Jiu Jitsu which had been modified for security guards but would have been suitable for police as well.

I was not sure what you meant by my basic premise being flawed. In this case I am asking a question about whether anyone has tried to modify MMA for police. In otherwords, removing techniquess that are not appropriate; making modifications where necessary; and retaining techniques where no modification is required.

Although I am not in law enforcement, I have a strong interest in police defensive tactics because I think the unarmed combat aspect of their role faces a lot of challenges. Because of this, I have read a lot of different manuals on Police Defensive tactics - because i'm interested. There is plenty of room for improvement. I would like to help improve those tactics one day.

I am surprised to hear you say that the pain compliance techniques used by police would not be permitted in MMA. The only pain compliance techniques that I am aware of the police using (wrist locks and kimuras) are in fact permitted in MMA (baton/OC spray does not count as the context is "unarmed"). Anything beyond those techniques are not going to be pain compliance but rather self defence - and the police would actually need to be in a position where they need to use self defence.

Part of what you have said assumes that the police officer has the advantage "resist arrest, discover a world of pain compliance techniques" - only if the police officer can successfully apply those techniques.

You mentioned "it's not a fair fight" which is 100% correct. For one thing, the police need to not only comply with the law, they also have to comply with policy which is often more strict than the law. But I don't see how this excludes MMA from being potentially useful to a law enforcement officer. Your comment "it's not a fair fight" makes me think that you believe police defensive encounters always involve a violent criminal who is determined to do the officer harm no matter what. Sometimes it's not a fair fight because the police officer is an average sized man and the criminal suffered from a genetic disease that causes his muscles to waste away - making the criminal extremely delicate.

Now it is my turn to say that I suspect you also haven't worked in law enforcement - and I don't mean this to be rude either. It is just your response does not really reflect the reality of what police defence tactics are all about. Here is what I think makes police defensive tactics an interesting subject:

1. People who passively resist.
2. People who actively resist (but don't attack).
3. Psychiatric patients.
4. People high on drugs who don't respond to pain.
5. People significantly weaker than the officer - people they need to lawfully control.
6. Weapon retention issues.
7. Avoidance is rarely an option.

As you can see, police defensive tactics have to cover a range of different scenarios. A police officer cannot knock someone out who is just passively resisting. They need to find other methods - perhaps they can try pain compliance, but what happens if the guy can't feel pain? Or what about if the person under arrest does not know what to do when they feel pain? Real world experience (from others who have shared with me) is that people often don't know what to do when pain compliance techniques are used. They might scream or struggle more and end up further injured. The police officer needs to be trained to tell someone what to do to cause the pain to stop. For example: "Give me your left hand and the pain stops". Another aspect of this is that the command is a positive command - you tell them what to do (not what NOT to do). Research shows that if you tell someone who is agitated to NOT do something, they are less likely to comply or stop struggling because they don't know what to do instead of struggle.

@drop bear Thanks for the videos Drop Bear, i'll check them out.

 

[drop bear]

Otherwise just being able to fight is super handy from a defensive tactics standpoint.

A guy called Jeff chan was recently thrown in to a reality based challenge. And him not being a reality based guy wasn't really a disadvantage because he was a fundamentally competent mma fighter. And could use good at fighting to solve problems.

 

[Hawk79]

Otherwise just being able to fight is super handy from a defensive tactics standpoint.

I disagree. I probably didn't explain myself well. Being able to fight is probably the easiest (from an academic perspective) part of defensive tactics. It will be very useful to a police officer who finds him or herself in a situation where they are being aggressively attacked and need to protect themselves. It will also be useful in giving the officer confidence (which may make other aspects of defensive tactics easier). Being able to fight is probably the least interesting part of police defensive tactics (although it is still pretty interesting - i'm a martial artist myself).

In most cases, police are not being aggressively attacked. So the well-rounded fighting capability of an MMA fighter does not solve many of the situations that a police officer will find themselves in.

As an example, what could a police officer do if they needed to break up an unlawful assembly and people had linked hands and sat down? Knowing how to fight does not really help the police officer in this situation. An MMA fighter could kick each person in the head one by one, knocking them out and then drag their unconscious selves away. The police don't have this as an option. Gracie Survival Tactics would suggest you grab their legs and lift them up above their head and give the foot to a officer standing behind them (effectively forcing them to do a backwards roll). This is an adaptation of Jiu Jitsu to police work.

What about a situation where someone is aggressively resisting and the officer is unable to get handcuffs on the suspect. The officer could use a kimura and then tell the suspect to place both hands behind his back in order for the pain to stop. The addition of the verbal (positive) command is essentially making a jiu jitsu technique applicable to police work.

My main experience is with Jiu Jitsu, so I don't really have any examples that apply to striking. I have only just started training striking and I am hoping to so more opportunities where striking/MMA might be able to be modified to be useful for police.

The only example I can think of right now is distance management. Police need to maintain a safe distance from someone who they are talking to on the streets or at traffic stops. Some kind of modified boxing drill would probably help them to be more aware of distance management.

 

[drop bear]

I disagree. I probably didn't explain myself well. Being able to fight is probably the easiest (from an academic perspective) part of defensive tactics. It will be very useful to a police officer who finds him or herself in a situation where they are being aggressively attacked and need to protect themselves. It will also be useful in giving the officer confidence (which may make other aspects of defensive tactics easier). Being able to fight is probably the least interesting part of police defensive tactics (although it is still pretty interesting - i'm a martial artist myself).

In most cases, police are not being aggressively attacked. So the well-rounded fighting capability of an MMA fighter does not solve many of the situations that a police officer will find themselves in.

As an example, what could a police officer do if they needed to break up an unlawful assembly and people had linked hands and sat down? Knowing how to fight does not really help the police officer in this situation. An MMA fighter could kick each person in the head one by one, knocking them out and then drag their unconscious selves away. The police don't have this as an option. Gracie Survival Tactics would suggest you grab their legs and lift them up above their head and give the foot to a officer standing behind them (effectively forcing them to do a backwards roll). This is an adaptation of Jiu Jitsu to police work.

What about a situation where someone is aggressively resisting and the officer is unable to get handcuffs on the suspect. The officer could use a kimura and then tell the suspect to place both hands behind his back in order for the pain to stop. The addition of the verbal (positive) command is essentially making a jiu jitsu technique applicable to police work.

My main experience is with Jiu Jitsu, so I don't really have any examples that apply to striking. I have only just started training striking and I am hoping to so more opportunities where striking/MMA might be able to be modified to be useful for police.

The only example I can think of right now is distance management. Police need to maintain a safe distance from someone who they are talking to on the streets or at traffic stops. Some kind of modified boxing drill would probably help them to be more aware of distance management.

The grappling changes when striking is involved. So learning how the striking mechanics work is learning how to grapple while exposing yourself to less danger.

So the ability to fight. Makes your ability to solve problems easier.

 

[Hawk79]

The grappling changes when striking is involved. So learning how the striking mechanics work is learning how to grapple while exposing yourself to less danger.

So the ability to fight. Makes your ability to solve problems easier.

"The grappling changes when striking is involved" - yes, that is true but that is not a major concern for police. The police are not regularly engaging in full on fights with people. Yes, it does happen, but that is not what makes Police Defensive tactics unique.

I think your response is more about winning a fight. It will help a police officer, in the rare occasions that he ends up in a fight. But they are more likely to deal with people who passively and actively resist. That means no striking is involved.

Passive resistances just means someone will not co-operate with the police. They might lie down and hide their hands underneath their stomach to prevent handcuffing. They are not striking the police.

Actively resisting might involve some pushing or struggling, but it is still not a fight.

That is why policing is unique. They are often not in self defence situations. Rather they are the attacker, but they are an attacker with limited options. The options they have change based on the actions of the defender. In ordinary everyday life if we saw someone wrestle someone to the ground and try and tie them up (handcuff them) we would think of that person as an aggressor and the person being tied up as a victim. So the police has a very interesting role - an ethical attacker. But of course, they also need to think tactically simply when talking to someone - they may not even be trying to arrest anyone. They may just be speaking to someone who could be a dangerous convict.

With that said, I do agree with you that understanding fighting mechanics would help them in the more extreme cases.

Your responses have helped clarify in my own head what it is the police are trying to do (i.e. they are often "attackers") - so thank you for that.

 

[drop bear]

"The grappling changes when striking is involved" - yes, that is true but that is not a major concern for police. The police are not regularly engaging in full on fights with people. Yes, it does happen, but that is not what makes Police Defensive tactics unique.

I think your response is more about winning a fight. It will help a police officer, in the rare occasions that he ends up in a fight. But they are more likely to deal with people who passively and actively resist. That means no striking is involved.

Passive resistances just means someone will not co-operate with the police. They might lie down and hide their hands underneath their stomach to prevent handcuffing. They are not striking the police.

Actively resisting might involve some pushing or struggling, but it is still not a fight.

That is why policing is unique. They are often not in self defence situations. Rather they are the attacker, but they are an attacker with limited options. The options they have change based on the actions of the defender. In ordinary everyday life if we saw someone wrestle someone to the ground and try and tie them up (handcuff them) we would think of that person as an aggressor and the person being tied up as a victim. So the police has a very interesting role - an ethical attacker. But of course, they also need to think tactically simply when talking to someone - they may not even be trying to arrest anyone. They may just be speaking to someone who could be a dangerous convict.

With that said, I do agree with you that understanding fighting mechanics would help them in the more extreme cases.

Your responses have helped clarify in my own head what it is the police are trying to do (i.e. they are often "attackers") - so thank you for that.

Not really. You should always be shutting down striking opportunities. From the point of contact untill you have let the guy go. Regardless of how passive the resistance is. That way they don't do something silly and hit you. And then they don't get hurt.

So your grappling should always consider striking options.

Police are definitely the predators. Even to the point of isolating people or not engaging untill they have the numbers to win the fight. Which is just a professional approach. They are supposed to win fights.

 

[Hawk79]

Not really. You should always be shutting down striking opportunities. From the point of contact untill you have let the guy go. Regardless of how passive the resistance is. That way they don't do something silly and hit you. And then they don't get hurt.

Can you tell me what you mean by that? I mean how to you shut down striking opportunities? This is exactly the kind of information I am interested in. I don't do MMA so I am not sure how this would work.

Police are definitely the predators. Even to the point of isolating people or not engaging untill they have the numbers to win the fight. Which is just a professional approach. They are supposed to win fights.

That's right, and that is why I think that they need a martial art that has the same level of active resistance and live training as MMA but modified for their needs. They are supposed to win, but in the safest possible way. They are also allowed to "cheat" if necessary for the purposes of enhancing safety.

If I was to convert MMA into "Police MMA" (remembering that I don't do MMA so am completely ignorant) the first thing I would change is that I would introduce teamwork. Police are allowed to work together, they are allowed to gang up on people. So that would be the first change I make. The next change would probably involve some kind of modification to distance management drills.

 

[drop bear]

Can you tell me what you mean by that? I mean how to you shut down striking opportunities? This is exactly the kind of information I am interested in. I don't do MMA so I am not sure how this would work.


That's right, and that is why I think that they need a martial art that has the same level of active resistance and live training as MMA but modified for their needs. They are supposed to win, but in the safest possible way. They are also allowed to "cheat" if necessary for the purposes of enhancing safety.

If I was to convert MMA into "Police MMA" (remembering that I don't do MMA so am completely ignorant) the first thing I would change is that I would introduce teamwork. Police are allowed to work together, they are allowed to gang up on people. So that would be the first change I make. The next change would probably involve some kind of modification to distance management drills.

Simple positional tricks like standing out of range. Moving in to range intelligently. Grappling in a manner that doesn't give them opportunity to strike.

So if I move from out of range into a clinch, two on one control, take their back, take them down. I will generally have a safer time than if I stand in front of them trying to wrist lock them or something.

Even things like head position either gives them an opening to strike or it doesn't.

Now regardless if their resistance is passive or not. I am not going to wave a free gift in front of them.

Throw some bjj combatives on that. And you have handcuffing.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1040862196892992

 

[Hawk79]

Grappling in a manner that doesn't give them opportunity to strike.

This was the part I was wondering about. Are there any specific things you can think of that a police officer could use? Remember, the Police Officer will be grappling to handcuff. So they are not going to be putting people in rubber guard or anything like that.

 

[punisher73]

Problem #1: What do you mean by MMA? There is no set system of what makes up MMA, so depending on what country you live in, the arts vary. Even here in the US, some favor a more "western" approach and use boxing/wrestling others may favor muay thai/bjj, while still others may favor muay thai/wrestling. Looking at more recent competitions, you are starting to see more TKD kicking elements in it also.

Problem #2: MMA is set up to be the most successful in a set environment with a specific ruleset. For example, Pride vs. UFC different strategies and tactics were seen based on the ruleset and ring/cage environment.

So....if you are just talking about certain skillsets that are usually found in MMA, such as, Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling, BJJ and adding in weapon control etc. Then you would be reinventing the wheel because that is pretty much what Krav Maga for LEO's does.