Pressure Point Techniques

Stay with me for a minute here Jim. Now, when I use a PP restraint or control technique and there is an inadvertant reaction from the patient, I'm O.K. because I was trained by you? You are willingly a part of my defense? I only ask because if you put someone unconscious, there is a restriction of blood flow to the brain. Neurological damage is also common when pressure points control is administered to an actively resisting subject.
 
Restraints, not Knockouts!

Make sure you understand I am not teaching how to render people unconscious, I am teaching to just restrain the patient. I know most people when they hear of PP work they think of knocking people out, but this is not always the case and not what I am teaching. Neurological damage can only happen if you intentionally knock the person out and do not revive them and even then is still very unlikely. The way that I teach this, you would have a hard time rendering someone unconscious, as you would have to know a lot more to do this. I do however cover what things you should and shouldn’t do with someone that is having a cardiovascular problem. I can not “guarantee” anything as these are just training techniques to help and anything can possibly go wrong as with anything else. As an example you could be trying to apply these techniques and accidentally stick your thumb in their eye and cause damage… it would have nothing to do with the techniques.
 
Here's the problem Jim. Again, I'm speaking as an administrator who may have to decide whether or not my personnel need the training you offer. They will learn restraining techniques that may or may not cause or exacerbate current injuries or medical problems. Now, of course, this is much different than a medic who is being attacked in the rear of an ambulance. That person obviously needs a way to escape the immediate danger. In a clinical or hospital setting, there may be enough staff available to use the 5 man "star" tactic" of limb and head restraint or chemical restraint, but unlikely in the field. However, understand that there are trained responses and then there are those techniques that are considered "untrained-but-justified." Your training seems well suited as a self defense program, but may cause a liability if endorsed by an employer. Any thoughts?
 
EMS Kyusho

Just thought I would put my simple two cents worth in, regarding the EMS video. I have read the posts and it seems to me that a lot of discussions have occurred regarding liability, effectiveness, and other issues. My question to those of you offering your opinions so strongly; Have you even seen what the video has to offer? That may answer your questions and concerns.
I prefer quick simple techniques that avoid wrestling for twenty minutes with a patient whatever the reson for doing so (too old and tired from callbacks for that nonsense). If a different take on the subject is available, give it a shot or at least see for yourself before passing judgment.
As with all training, protocols, guidelines or anything else; all things, whether medicine adminstration, extrication, or retraint techniques should be used with common sense, self-control, and utmost concern for the safety of your crew and the patient.
My thoughts are if you stick with those ideas you will be better off.

Regards to all.
Spindoctor1
 
Spindoctor1 said:
Just thought I would put my simple two cents worth in, regarding the EMS video. I have read the posts and it seems to me that a lot of discussions have occurred regarding liability, effectiveness, and other issues. My question to those of you offering your opinions so strongly; Have you even seen what the video has to offer? That may answer your questions and concerns.
I prefer quick simple techniques that avoid wrestling for twenty minutes with a patient whatever the reson for doing so (too old and tired from callbacks for that nonsense). If a different take on the subject is available, give it a shot or at least see for yourself before passing judgment.
As with all training, protocols, guidelines or anything else; all things, whether medicine adminstration, extrication, or retraint techniques should be used with common sense, self-control, and utmost concern for the safety of your crew and the patient.
My thoughts are if you stick with those ideas you will be better off.

Regards to all.
Spindoctor1
Click to expand...


Well let me put it like this. I tried to be civil about the whole thing.

There is a post that says you should have a minimum of 10 posts prior to any advertising.

Secondly......... I am a paramedic with 16 years in the field. I have 11 years of law enforcment experience and have taught hundreds of karate students, police officers and EMS personnel.

I can tell you from personal experience that a lot of the "feel good" pressure point type stuff has failed me and many others in the field.


Most EMS providers don't have the luxury of working out on a regular basis for whatever reason. Therefore I feel very,very strongly about any training they receive.

DT4EMS goes WWWWAAAAAAAYYYYY beyond just the physical aspects of the potential violent encounter.

We spend time on documentation, courtroom demeanor as well as survival mindset, understanding stress and it's effects on the body........

Plus I give tons of it away for free.

My course has been evaluated by doctors, one of which became the medical director for the program, police officers, nurses, administrators and educators alike.

I don't know what is on the DVD........... why don't you post it for us to see?

and if you would like to see what people have said about my course look here:


"I really enjoy all of the hands on experience. Kip not only tells you what and how to do something, but he lets you practice until you have it down. Kip has a very strong passion for self-defense and for sharing his experience and knowledge with others. This makes you want to learn".

Jeff Ward, Paramedic



"....the information provided makes me feel more prepared to handle myself with a questionable patient or situation".

L. Barrett NREMT-P, Ozark County Ambulance District





" I have been to 3 different EMS defense classes and this one by far surpasses the others."

Garett Raney





"It was interesting to me to see these techniques really work, especially with petite individuals like me..... By using the steps taught, I was able to bring down individuals much larger than I".

Penny Fuller, NREMT-P, Willow Springs Ambulance District





"I am the Ambulance Administrator For Ozarks Medical Center and I think that any Service or ER dept. that is not using or going to use DT4EMS are headed in the wrong direction in healthcare. I went to the class for 2 days and learned more than I had in 12 years on the truck. I took a beating like everyone else and it was worth every second of it . I can't wait to do it again."
Farrell R.Graves, EMT-P / Ambulance Administration, OMC





"I just took the DT4EMS class 07/20/05 in West Plains, MO and WOW it was awesome!!! KIP and BRUCE you guys are GREAT at what you do and how you teach!! I have been in EMS for 17yrs now, 10 as a medic and I learned more in 2 days about self defense than I thought possible. I feel so much more confident now about my and my partners personal safety. THANK YOU !!!! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK GUYS!!"
Student, Class of 07/20/05 - 07/21/05





"I just attended the class with Kip and Bruce as instructiors and I am still stoked!!! This is Paramedic/LEO talking to EMS/ER in a no nonsense hands on practical approach. I studied karate for 2 years and was completely blown away by the simplicity and practicality of this program. We were taught mental, physical and legal aspects of everything. This class made me view things from a different angle that may very well save my butt one day. The FIST suit was a humbling experience. No fluff of fancy crap here. No macho crap either. Most seminars I retain 1 maybe 2 points. Here I found myself watching the DVD when I got home to plant the principles deep. I am looking forward to any refreshers offered."

Sam Voshell, Student - Class of 07/20/05 - 07/21/05





"This is hands down the best course available for EMS. Covered very simple, but very effective methods of distraction. By the end of the 2d day, a layperson will have these methods down. Be aware -- this is not a self-defense course taught by some ninja, but by a paramedic/police officer/martial arts instructor who has been there (in the EMS setting) and understands the ins and outs of the job and what we all experience out there (and also what we MAY experience). You take this course, and you will learn ways to give yourself and your partner at least a few seconds of distraction in order to make an escape from a dangerous or potentially dangerous scene. Do yourself a favor...check this class out and talk to your supervisor about getting it in your area. Rural EMS has long needed a course like this. Props to the instructors for taking the time to put this together. A very enjoyable experience...with CEU's to boot!"

Steven Duffel, Student - Class of 07/20/05 - 07/21/05



“Kip’s knowledge and demonstration of all skills is amazing. And the fact that each instructor, especially him will stop everything and go one on one with you so you can grasp the material and skill better. EVERYONE should go to the (DT4EMS) class.”

Nate Bean, EMT, EMT-P Student SCCC - Class of 02/15/06 - 02/16/06



“This was a very awesome class, I wish I had it a few weeks ago to help deal with a patient……..”

Wendy, EMT-P Student SCCC - Class of 02/15/06 - 02/16/06


That is just a few..............


Here are some of the places I have taught courses for:
South Central Career Center - Paramedic Program



IHM Health Studies Center (St. Louis, MO)



Mineral Area College Law Enforcement Academy (Park Hills, MO)

Jefferson College Law Enforcement Training Academy (Hillsboro, MO)

Sullivan Police Department (Sullivan, MO)

Jasper County Sheriff’s Department (Jasper County, MO)

Dan Chadd’s Tae Kwon Do (Sullivan, MO)

Ripley County Sheriff’s Department (Ripley County, MO)

Taney County Sheriff’s Department (Forsyth, MO)

Bourbon Police Department (Bourbon, MO)

Ozark County Sheriff’s Department (Gainesville, MO)

New World Martial Arts Academy (Collinsville, IL)

Cliff’s Karate (West Plains, MO)

Ozark County Ambulance (Gainesville, MO)

Oregon County Ambulance (Thayer, MO)

Ozarks Medical Center (West Plains, MO)

Willow Springs Ambulance District (Willow Springs, MO)

Missouri Sheriff’s Training Academy (Jefferson City, MO)



Sullivan Elementary School (Sullivan, MO)

Bourbon High School (Bourbon, MO)

Bourbon Elementary School (Bourbon, MO)

St. Francois County Sheriff's Dept (Farmington, MO)



Alton R-IV School (Alton, MO)


and did you see the FREE articles and video's I have posted here?

There is so much more to Defensive Tactics than the actual technique.
 
One more thing...

First of all, thank you spindoctor1 for seeing through the clutter! That was a lot of what I've been trying to say.

On that note, DT4EMS; I have never doubted your system. From what I have seen (clips on myspace...I will have my own clips posted on my profile soon), it looks really good. So isn't it possible that mine might be good too? (Sorry about the "10-post rule"; I was not aware.) I'm not saying that my techniques should replace everything that's out there. I'm just saying it's something else that you can add to your toolbox. There is more than one way to skin a cat, as the cliche goes. I'm just giving people the option to learn something new. Learning is a type of brainstorming; you take a whole bunch of ideas and then pick the best one(s) for the scenario.

On that note, I am still available to answer questions about kyusho, but other than that I'm stepping out now. If anyone is interested, they know where they can get the video. Thank you everyone, and have a wonderful holiday season.
 
Your system again, may be very good. If you notice my early posts it isnt so much about DT4EMS as it is "what" is taught.

Here is an interesting article :

Have Martial Artists Corrupted Defensive Tactics and Close Quarter Combat Training?
By John D. Williams
Posted on NaturalStrength.com on July 8, 2006
Background

Martial artists have through various methods engineered a reputation as self-defense or unarmed combat experts. They use this reputation to attract students who seek to gain the ability to defend themselves in violent confrontations. In reality many martial artists are not self-defense or unarmed combat experts and many common martial arts combative methodologies are questionable at best and often very dangerous.

When students seek training from martial artists they are usually what we call consciously incompetent, that is they cannot handle themselves in a violent confrontation and they realize this fact. Often after training with martial arts instructors students develop what we call unconscious incompetence, that is they still cannot handle themselves in a violent confrontation, but think that they can.

The following example demonstrates what is the tragic result is often. A person in Australia by the name of Max, trained for several years in a very popular martial art and was awarded a black belt. He was also in the Australian military and had recently completed a one month intensive full-time unarmed combat course. That course was taught by the instructors who at that time trained the Australian S.A.S. One night Max discovered a person with a knife, vandalizing someone else's car. Without his training Max would have avoided the person and remained unharmed. Instead, Max thought, "Beauty, this is my chance to lay this guy out and be a hero".

The vandal came at Max with the knife pointing downwards. A popular martial arts theory states that attackers who hold the knife downwards are not dangerous, because they do not know what they are doing (See quote by Bill Wallace, Section 3 (r)) and Max had successfully defended against knife attacks thousands of times in training. Max found out the hard way how ineffective and misleading his training had been. He is lucky to have lived through the education process.

How Martial Artists Have Engineered a Reputation as Self-Defense or Unarmed Combat Experts

Martial artists often appear in television programs and movies. In choreographed fight scenes, martial arts skills appear to be very effective.

Martial artists perform spectacular attacking and defensive techniques against cooperative opponents.
The culture surrounding martial arts training is engineered to create "guru" status for the instructors. Such cultural aspects include the wearing of special belts and uniforms, requiring students to bow to instructors, having students address instructors using titles such as "Master" and "Sensei", having the instructors at the front of the dojo (training site) while the lower ranked participants are at the rear, having the instructors perform seemingly incredible feats against cooperative partners, forms of showmanship such as breaking boards and having the instructors pass judgment in the form of passing or failing grades.

Martial artists seek positions as instructors or engineer other forms of association with law enforcement or military agencies. Alternatively martial artists have their arts methodology adopted as a training standard within such agencies. These marketing strategies help them to sell training and commercial merchandise to the martial artists' primary source of revenue - the general public.

Martial artists engineer status in sporting competitions which students interpret to be relevant to situations outside the sporting and training environments.

Martial artists claim that their methodology has been handed down over many generations or has some other traditional or cultural significance.

Martial artists use business names, advertising or other promotional material that implies expertise.
Martial artists fail to provide specific information or disclaimers that convey that their martial art is designed for sport, fitness, cultural study, entertainment, discipline or whatever, rather than being suitable preparation for violent encounters outside the training environment.

Martial artists certify the ability of students or cause students to believe that because of training they (the students) are proficient. These endorsements include the awarding of belts, certificates and the like, passing an examination, or implying proficiency by allowing students to participate in dangerous activities or occupations.

The Tactical Inadequacies of Martial Arts Training

Basing the preparation for real life violence on sporting methodology: It is dangerous to believe that methodology designed for sporting contests is effective preparation for real violence. In all sporting events there are rules and fixed boundaries of acceptable conduct. Combatants usually know they will be fighting only one opponent and there will be no other obstacles or threats.

In sports such as Judo and kickboxing, combatants know that they will only be fighting one opponent. As a result people training for such events learn to focus their vision only on that opponent. The result is a form of learned habitual tunnel vision. This is completely counter to one's needs in real violence, where one needs enhanced peripheral vision to detect other attackers, obstacles and escape routes.

Participation in sparring and fighting competitions usually develops timing and reflexes that are detrimental in real violence. As an example, most sparring is either light contact or non-contact. For maximum effect, strikes should be performed so the weapon (e.g., fist or foot) aims to pass through its target. In sparring, the weapon is thrown to avoid or just touch the target. As a result, sparring strikes can be initiated from approximately eight inches (20 cm) further away than effective strikes. In real violence one performs as one practices.

Even in so called full contact training and competition, one is usually competing against one's friends or people one respects, so opponents rarely give maximum intent to seriously crippling one another.

A sporting orientation develops a tendency to use each side of the body in a different manner. For example, a right-handed boxer will stand facing an opponent with his left foot slightly forward. He will learn to throw jab and hook punches with the left arm and cross punches with the right. Too many martial artists practice similarly, consistently executing attacks and defenses from a favored stance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This method of preparation is very dangerous for real violence, where conditions such as the angle of attack are not controlled. As an example, consider the situation that would occur if the right-handed boxer above was attacked from his right. Most likely one of the following scenarios would result:

the boxer would be forced to throw an unpracticed (hence ineffective) right jab or left cross,
the boxer would attempt to turn right into his favored stance, causing a delay in his defensive reaction, or
being subject to an angle of attack not practiced against, the boxer's brain may momentarily "freeze".
In each scenario, the boxer would be at a severe disadvantage, from which he may never recover.

Ignoring the response sequence

There are three steps that must occur when responding to an attack:

First, the opponent's attack must be sensed (e.g., it must be seen, felt, heard, etc),
Second, the specifics of the attack must be cognitively processed (i.e., the attack must be recognized and its parameters determined), and
Third, the defender must respond.




When responding to most attacks the defender is always two steps behind. Anyone who is not a gifted athlete or highly trained professional will not be able to employ a defensive skill quickly enough to counter an opponent's attack once it is underway.

Many self-defense techniques taught by martial artists ignore this fact. A typical martial arts self-defense technique will involve the blocking of an attack followed by the employment of an often spectacular counterattack. It is assumed that the block will be successful. Blocks usually are successful in a training environment because 1) the defender knows what sort of attack is coming and when it will occur; 2) the attacker is usually cooperative; and 3) the attack is rarely performed in a decisive manner.

The same technique applied in real violence usually fails. As an example, knife and club attacks are usually defended successfully in martial arts training sessions, but it has been proven with the use of felt tip markers and soft clubs that even highly trained athletes, such as SWAT Team or Special Forces members, can rarely prevent being stabbed, cut or struck by a committed attacker.

The use of highly skilled techniques

When one of the FBI's top unarmed combat instructors was faced with a thief holding a pistol, the FBI agent used a very basic clubbing action to strike the hand holding the gun. This example demonstrates that in a life or death situation even a highly trained professional reverts to simple technique. The reason for this is because simple techniques are the most reliable. Higher skilled techniques are more difficult to perform and have a smaller margin for error. This is especially important when fear or other factors restrict or inhibit physical and mental performance.

Despite this fact, too many martial arts instructors tend to emphasize higher skilled and more complicated techniques. Possible reasons for this are: 1) showmanship, 2) to engineer guru status, 3) to justify further training and grading fees and 4) an arrogant refusal to acknowledge the realities of fear.

If a top professional uses basic technique in real violent situations, it is extremely dangerous to teach lesser practitioners high skilled techniques.







The emphasis or reliance upon grappling techniques

Grappling techniques have become popular because of the success of competitors using grappling techniques in so called "no holds barred" sporting competitions. While grappling techniques are unquestionably useful in one-on-one competition, and there is considerable merit in the Jujitsu teaching that -most real fights- end up with combatants on the ground, the use of grappling techniques when one is outnumbered is suicidal.

In training for real violence the possibility of being outnumbered cannot be ignored. This is demonstrated by the fact that of the 267 South African Police officials murdered between January and September 1997, over 30% were outnumbered at a ratio of at least 3:1.
 
Very simply, when applying a grappling hold, one's body becomes immobile and defenseless. A third person can easily cave in the grappler's head with a pool cue, garbage can lid, a rock, or other weapon.

Failure to develop the attributes necessary to survive a violent confrontation

Even if techniques are performed thousands of times with robot-like confidence and technical accuracy in the training environment, it is not sufficient preparation for dealing with the dynamics of real violence. To employ techniques outside of training requires attributes such as timing, reflexes, coordination, spontaneity, speed and power plus the intangible qualities such as purpose, confidence, spirit and desire to win.

If training does not go beyond the teaching of technique to have a deliberate goal of improving those attributes and qualities, the training will be more detrimental than productive.

Patterning subconscious minds with incorrect response sequences

In real violence one's opponent dictates one's actions. For example, an opponent's strike dictates the appropriate counter. The opponent's body position in relation to one's own body position dictates the most appropriate strike or technique to employ.

Martial arts training often ignores this fact. Students are typically taught complicated series of moves such as arm lock flows, katas and patterns. These series of moves are supposed to be practiced against an opponent or opponents acting in a very specific manner. Unfortunately real attackers rarely attack in the same specific manner.

Rather than learning that "technique A" is the appropriate response to an opponent's "attack A", students subconscious minds are programmed that "technique A" is followed by "technique B, which is followed by "technique C" etc. This patterning is very dangerous in real violence.

Irresponsible and misleading allocation of training time

If martial arts training is to be effective training for real violence, the allocation of training time should reflect field needs. Most real violence involves the use of punches, elbows, knees, low kicks and grappling. Real violence is usually initiated with opponents standing almost chest to chest, or alternatively with an opponent rushing his victim from the front, side, or rear.

Real violence very rarely involves combatants standing apart in so called "fighting stances". Spending considerable time defending against elaborate kicks, or against attackers standing apart in "fighting stances" is irresponsible as it takes time away from relevant training. These practices also give students a dangerously misleading idea of what real violence involves.

Similar irresponsible and dangerous time allocation occurs when practicing offensive skills. At a martial arts training session attended by a Director of Global Security Training, a large portion of time was devoted to practicing running jump front kicks against a target nine feet off the ground. The need to head-kick a nine foot tall attacker is very rare.

Failure to prepare for the detrimental effects of fear

Fear restricts body movement and inhibits mental and physical coordination. Even the act of placing a key in a keyhole can be difficult if one is scared. This needs to be considered when selecting techniques that are taught. In addition, students need to be provided with methods of fear control and an honest appreciation of the realities of violence. Failure to do so will almost certainly result in students not being able to perform well in real violence.

Failure to select field-proven techniques

The best reason to select a technique is because it has been proven to be useful in real violence. We strongly believe that very few martial arts techniques, when scrutinized, would be supported by significant field testing.

The practice of instructing when one has little or no practical understanding of the situations students are likely to face.






Too many martial artists have little understanding of their art's field application. While it would be wrong to encourage martial artists to be involved in real fights, one must seriously question the merit of having students prepared for possible life or death situations learning from instructors with no practical understanding of their (the student's) requirements.

Failure to ensure that training is ongoing

Neuromuscular skills such as self-defense ability rapidly diminish without regular practice. This reduction is difficult to quantify, however it could be reasonably argued that self-defense ability would be significantly reduced after three months of not training and markedly reduced after six months. As such, it would be dangerous to imply competency when training is not ongoing. As a result the following are questionable and possibly dangerous practices: 1)the awarding of certificates or belts, or passing examinations, without the requirement of regular, frequent and continuous practice and 2) allowing people to work in occupations exposing them to potential violence without regular, frequent and ongoing training.

Confusing loyalty and friendship with field effectiveness

The nature of martial arts and combative training attracts personalities with a natural respect for characteristics such as honor, valor and loyalty. Instructors who demonstrate such admirable characteristics often attract large followings of faithful disciples and loyal friends. When the field effectiveness of methods taught by an instructor such as this is questioned, the disciples and loyal friends will readily ignore objectivity, instead responding emotionally and subjectively.

Attempting to achieve "correct" body mechanics by making repeated fine adjustments

If a student properly understands the principles and objectives of a technique, and uses this understanding to guide repeated training, over time he or she will develop good body mechanics. Rather than focus on this understanding and its application, too many instructors attempt to mold "correct" body mechanics for a technique by making repeated adjustments, as a golf professional would do to correct a golf swing. Examples of such adjustments include telling a student to rotate a wrist more, raise a knee more, and to point toes more.

From an instructor's perspective this practice helps engineer guru status for him or herself and fosters dependency in students. From a student's perspective this practice is extremely detrimental.




Students' bodies vary. To fully understand how these variations effect the execution of techniques would require the instructor to have:

a depth of field experience in the use of the techniques in actual violent situations and
a depth of knowledge in the science known as Biomechanics. Too many instructors instead base the principles of correction on advice handed down through a chain of other instructors or martial arts gurus. Ironically, most probably none of these instructors or martial arts gurus would have both field experience and qualifications in Biomechanics either.

The so-called "correct" body mechanics as determined by such instructors would most likely be inferior to the body mechanics that would have developed using the methods described at the opening of this section.

The practice of molding "correct" body mechanics for a technique by making repeated adjustments tends to result in a student performing techniques in a robot-like manner. This may be acceptable for a golfer, but such practice tends to reduce the qualities of fluidity, spontaneity and adaptability. The possession of these qualities is vitally important for one to survive real violence.

Students who have become reliant upon having an instructor providing critique of fine body mechanics will find it difficult to train independently. This may not concern members of the general public who attend training dojos on a regular basis, but is a concern for members of government law enforcement and security agencies. These members, who need to train regularly to maintain competency in handling real violence, paradoxically often have less exposure to instructors than many members of the general public do.

Sadly, but too frequently, law enforcement or security officers are trained by instructors who focus on molding "correct" body mechanics for a technique by making repeated adjustments. The result is officers who 1) do not understand the principles and objectives of the techniques they have learned, 2) perform in a robot-like manner and lose qualities that would help survive real violence and 3) only train when they are given instruction, which in many cases is only a few times per year (or worse - only during basic training).
 
Reliance or heavy emphasis on pressure point or joint manipulation

The understanding of where the most vulnerable areas of an opponent's body are is very useful. Such an understanding should include the knowledge that:

areas such as the groin and the solar plexus are excellent targets for strikes,
knees may be damaged by forceful strikes to their side, and joints such as elbows and fingers may be damaged when bent backwards, and
certain areas such as the side of the neck, areas of the ribs and the front of the shoulders are extremely painful when pressed upon.
The understanding of vulnerable areas can be taken to the extreme of learning as many so called pressure points as an acupuncturist does. Some martial artists base their fighting methodology on the so called ability to manipulate these points. There are three main concerns with this practice.
Firstly, in situations of real violence it is extremely unlikely that a technique will be able to be employed with sufficient accuracy to achieve the desired result.
Secondly, in order to practice such techniques both the attacker and the defender usually train in a profoundly unrealistic robot-like manner.
Thirdly, such practice tends to encourage a proliferation of very questionable techniques. Examples found in this author's collection of martial arts training videos include an instructor demonstrating a light tap above the temple, with which he was alleged to have been knocked out by his eight year old son, and another instructor who advises to rub a certain "rub pressure point" on a grasping attacker's wrist.
The learning of multiple responses to a visual or physical cue

There is a valid argument for the value of learning alternative responses to a given situation in order to increase one's versatility. However, the value of increasing one's versatility must be weighed against the sometimes dramatic increase in one's reaction time that occurs in real situations of real violence, when an individual has learned more than one response to the visual or physical cue that presents.

If only one response to a cue is learned and practiced effectively it should become a reflex action. If presented with the appropriate cue, the response will occur quickly and automatically, without the need for conscious mental processing. If more than one response for a cue is learned, and that cue presents itself, a student would have to choose between responses, requiring mental processing rather than a much faster reflex response. In situations of lesser danger, especially where one has significantly greater ability than one's opponent, this may not be a critical factor. It must be stressed that in situations of real violence fear restricts mental processes, increasing this reaction time further. The more dangerous the situation the more one needs fast reactions, but ironically more fear is usually involved, and this slowing down of reactions is dangerously heightened.

An extreme example of learning too many responses to a cue is found in one of this author's martial arts training tapes where an instructor in the style developed by Bruce Lee demonstrates an almost unbelievable multitude of variations for responding to a basic right cross punch.

The learning of too many techniques

For similar reasons that instructors tend to emphasize higher skilled techniques, too many instructors tend to teach too many techniques. One requires a certain amount of practice to learn and to retain each technique. Simply, when a large number of techniques are learned, time does not permit competency to be retained. Too many techniques are probably being learned in the following situations:

more than one response is learned for a given cue,
one learns a skill, then once that skill is evaluated or graded new skills are learned, and the original skill is neglected,
one learns different strikes that are essentially used in the same situation (a possible example is an "uppercut" fist strike and an upward elbow strike, which are both used as an upwards blow against similar targets on an opponent at close range),
one learns many specific responses rather than adaptable techniques that can be used in many situations (for example, learning possibly hundreds of different responses to handle the many different possible grip positions that can occur when grabbed by the arm)
The practice of having students perform large set numbers of technique repetitions

To practice a technique effectively, one should focus on that technique's objectives. The practice of instructing a student to perform a large set number of techniques removes this focus and tends to produce very ineffective robot-like training. As an example, consider the situation that would arise if a student was asked to perform a technique one hundred times. Initially the student may focus on the objectives of the technique, but as the series progressed focus would transfer to such things as the count, whether the instructor was watching or even what the student was going to do after training.
 
The communication of questionable statements

In Australia, a person can be held liable for damages caused as a result of another party following his or her advice. The main criteria is whether the person giving the information should realize that the recipient will rely upon it in circumstances in which it is reasonable to do so. Presumably similar law exists in other countries.

The following two quotes are some of many statements deserving of scrutiny that this author has found in his collection of martial arts training videos. They are both made by highly respected and influential martial artists. They are presented without judgement by this author. The reader is encouraged to draw his or her own conclusions regarding their merit and the consequences of people following the advice.

"The flow of energy is what makes it so easy to handle four or five [attackers] at one time. It gets to be very exciting" Aikido Master Ken Ota (Video: Mastering Aikido Level 6, Panther Productions).

"If my opponent holds a knife in this position [blade pointing downwards] I have my confidence because he's telling me that he doesn't really know how to use a knife. If he holds it like this (like a sword) he has an understanding of the knife and wants to use it to scare you" (Bill "Superfoot" Wallace., Undefeated world karate champion, Member of the Black Belt Hall of Fame (Video: Bill Wallace Self-Defence System, Panther Productions)

Suggestions for Organizations Using This Brief to Scrutinize Their Own Training
An effective way to use the enclosed brief is to have experienced officers and legal counsel assess the validity and strength of each argument raised. Using those arguments found to be valid and significant, current training should be closely examined.

It should be kept in mind that officers who are injured as a result of violence may also closely examine the training, with the help of lawyers. Any inadequacy found may form a basis for legal liability. Such officers and lawyers will be able to see behind any facades developed by martial arts oriented instructors attempting to protect their interests.

To assist in the process of examination, and provide a legal safeguard, this author and his company are able to provide advice, assistance and audits of training.

The Removal of Tactically Inadequate Martial Arts Methodologies
Unless approached in a systematic and decisive manner the removal of martial arts tactical inadequacies is very difficult because of three main factors.

Firstly, most instructors and external martial arts gurus have used methods previously described to engineer respect and close personal ties within their organization.

Secondly, most of the tactical inadequacies discussed benefit instructors and martial arts gurus in one or more of the following ways:

help engineer guru status,
help foster dependency in students, and
help justify further fees for instruction, grades and merchandise (many government instructors train members of the general public also). Instructors are most unlikely to readily concede these benefits.
Thirdly, many officers have been indoctrinated by martial arts movies, martial arts gurus and sporting practitioners to believe that these methodologies are effective.

Law enforcement and security officers are human, so even in the most professional government law enforcement and security organizations, members are not immune to these factors. As an example, according to an article in The Tactical Edge, the journal of the National Tactical Officers Association, because many officers want to be taught exotic techniques to impress family and friends in non-life threatening situations, tactical teams are taught by a myriad of instructors with absolutely no understanding of the agent's needs, equipment or mission requirements.

In South Africa, beginning with units such as the Special Task Force, SWAT Teams and Nelson Mandela's personal protection unit, this author and his company are removing tactically inadequate martial arts training methodology and are replacing it with a highly effective form of training called Kontact. From experience, pockets of resistance to changes are usually encountered, the most common being from complacent bureaucrats who have little understanding of the needs of field officers, instructors trying to protect their interests and senior officers who have been indoctrinated to believe that their guru and their course are "the best".

This author has much empathy with another group of officers who resist change. These are the experienced field officers and former field officers who have understood that all the previous defensive tactics and close quarter combat training they have been exposed to has been ineffective. They perceive such training as window dressing at best and an irresponsible waste of departmental resources at worst. They have seen many martial arts gurus and so called self-defense experts who claim that their system is "the best", that they understandably believe any one who claims to be an expert in that field, or to have a new system that is "the best", is beneath contempt.

The main requirement to overcome resistence is a commitment and directive from senior command.
Appendix One: About the Author
Robert Redenbach is a Senior Instructor for the South African Police Service and C.E.O. of Global Security Training P/L, a consultancy firm that provides specialist training to many of the world's leading agencies. Formerly with the Australian military, Mr. Redenbach spent three years in Korea, Japan and China studying martial arts methods. Seeking to address the inadequacies of such training, Mr. Redenbach used a period as the manager of the largest security company in Papua New Guinea to develop an innovative training system called Kontact. He is author of the book KONTACT: Training to Improve, Not to Impress.

A post graduate Masters by Research candidate, Dr Graeme Blennerhassett assists in the scientific evaluation and selection of instructional, training and combative methodologies.

Appendix Two: Where to Address Inquiries
The Director of Operations
P.O. Box 674 Bairnsdale 3875
Australia
(Tel.) 61-(0)1 9944440
(Fax.) 61-(0)3 51523894
(Email) global@b150.aone.net.au
Appendix Three: Checklist to assist in determining whether martial artists have corrupted law enforcement or security training.

Do the instructors make statements that seem unrealistic or exaggerated?
Are any of the training or combative methodologies based on sporting practices, or are claimed to have cultural or traditional significance?

Do the instructors demonstrate self-defence techniques where the attacker's strikes are easily blocked?
Do the techniques taught appear highly skilled, complicated, or even ridiculous?
Is there a heavy emphasis or reliance upon grappling techniques?
Does the training ignore the specific need to improve attributes such as timing, reflexes, coordination, spontaneity, speed and power plus the intangible qualities such as purpose, confidence, spirit and will to win?

Are students required to memorize complicated series of techniques?
Is a large proportion of training time dedicated to activities of minimal relevance?
Does the training ignore the need to provide an appreciation of the realities of real violence and a field-proven method of fear reduction?

Is training or combative methodology used that has not been field-proven as efficient and effective for its intended purpose?

Do the instructors have little or no practical appreciation of the situations students may face?
Does any aspect of the training appear to be irrelevant to the objective of preparing officers for real violence?
Are officers allowed to work in the field without the requirement of continuous, frequent,
ongoing training?
Do instructors attempt to produce good body mechanics by making continuous adjustments to body movements (as a golf professional would do to produce a good golf swing)?

Is training for techniques, defenses or attacks carried out using both sides of the body equally?
Is there a reliance or heavy emphasis on pressure point or joint manipulation?
Are multiple responses learned to a visual or physical cue?
Are too many techniques learned?
Are students required to perform large set numbers of technique repetitions?



John D. Williams
LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
LEADERSHIP & TRAINING DIVISION
(213) 893-5171 jdwillia@lasd.org
 
Closed-Minded

You just aren't getting it!
1) I am not trying to take away from anybody learning from you. As I said before, I'm offering a different method for people to choose from.
2) I am NOT teaching anybody to attack or counterattack anyone! This is not JUST about self-defense, it is restraint! To restrain people, don't you have to grab people anyway?
3) You seem to have a very closed-minded perspective of martial arts. It is not just "punching kicking and blocking"... this is KYUSHO. I recommend you research the subject of kyusho before completely putting it down. You say you have pressure point training; I don't know what (limited) training you had, but you certainly didn't have the opportunity to learn much about it. I have had people who have had this training, and it works for them.

I will have clips posted soon; I'm working on it. If you like it, great. If not, that's fine too.
Before you said you weren't putting this down, but you seem to be fighting it very hard. I didn't come here to fight. I came here to introduce EMT's to a new option for controlling combative patients.
If you put half the effort into promoting your own system as you have into putting mine down, you should do very well with it. You say you give a lot of it away for free, so do I. I do charge for the DVD and seminars, private lessons, etc... but I don't charge for consulting, private emails to answer questions, phone calls, Q&A on the Kyusho International forum, etc. I don't give the DVD away for free - it's like a private lesson you can watch over and over and worth every penny.
 
emskyusho said:
You just aren't getting it!
1) I am not trying to take away from anybody learning from you. As I said before, I'm offering a different method for people to choose from.
2) I am NOT teaching anybody to attack or counterattack anyone! This is not JUST about self-defense, it is restraint! To restrain people, don't you have to grab people anyway?
3) You seem to have a very closed-minded perspective of martial arts. It is not just "punching kicking and blocking"... this is KYUSHO. I recommend you research the subject of kyusho before completely putting it down. You say you have pressure point training; I don't know what (limited) training you had, but you certainly didn't have the opportunity to learn much about it. I have had people who have had this training, and it works for them.

I will have clips posted soon; I'm working on it. If you like it, great. If not, that's fine too.
Before you said you weren't putting this down, but you seem to be fighting it very hard. I didn't come here to fight. I came here to introduce EMT's to a new option for controlling combative patients.
If you put half the effort into promoting your own system as you have into putting mine down, you should do very well with it. You say you give a lot of it away for free, so do I. I do charge for the DVD and seminars, private lessons, etc... but I don't charge for consulting, private emails to answer questions, phone calls, Q&A on the Kyusho International forum, etc. I don't give the DVD away for free - it's like a private lesson you can watch over and over and worth every penny.
Click to expand...


Please don't take personal offense. I am not :) I am simply helping debate this in an open fashion.

Like I said before I was trained as a law enforcement PPCT (Pressure Point Control) Instructor.

When you talke "restraint" techniques......... are you teaching the EMS provider the "Law" regarding such?

Many states have laws pertaining to "patient restraint".

When I teach "restraint" techniques to EMS........... there is absolutely nothing fancy about it. It is one simple concept............. Elbow Control.

If it is a patient you are dealing with, not an attacker........... there is no need for anything fancy. But again........if you are teaching or suggesting something that goes against the "Position" the NAEMSP has taken on pateint "restraint" you are opening up people for a law suit. Because if the "experts" say one thing and we teach something else we have failed our students.

The other thing is check on Charly Miller. She has done extensive research n patient restraint. Do you cover topics such as "Restraint Asphyxia" or Excited Delirium?

Patients die because of "restraints".

Again, please don't take this personal. I promise you this........... if you are teaching good information I will be your best ally. But "if" you are teaching crap I will gladly debate you in any setting you wish.

Restraints are a burning issue in EMS. Providers get hurt trying to apply restraints when they shouldn't and sometimes patients get hurt too. The area of pateint restraint has many, many legal ramifications that is why I keep saying it is way more than just the "physical" attributes one must have a great understanding of.
 
DT4EMS you say elbow control. Do you mean that if you can control the Elbow and the Knees you can control that extrimity? Because that is what I was taught by some old medics when I was a young emt. And to this day 99% of time that is all you need to control and you have them controled good enough to get away from them.
 
jeepmedic said:
DT4EMS you say elbow control. Do you mean that if you can control the Elbow and the Knees you can control that extrimity? Because that is what I was taught by some old medics when I was a young emt. And to this day 99% of time that is all you need to control and you have them controled good enough to get away from them.
Click to expand...

Yes.

A simple single "tactic" can help with not only patient restraint but can be taken to many levels including escape.

See "technique" fails in the real world. It is having sound "tactics" regardless of what they are. Now sometimes techniques are involved in tactics but the MMA has proven many techniques useless.

Pitcure this:

You have a diabetic that you are attempting to establish an IV in......... one person holds the area of the elbow while you start the line and secure it. Here you would be acting under "implied consent".

In the self-defense setting, you have a 300lb biker coming off of the stretcher........... you slide up the bench seat as you push from behind their elbow .....all the time yelling at your partner to stop the truck so you can get out.

If you are on your back and a person is on top of you trying to crush your throat with their forearm.......... pushing from behind their elbow across your body will free your airway.

If a person is armed with an object......... getting behind the elbow and pushing it across thier body as you run the other direction..........

See............ a multitude of "techniques" can come from remembering something as simple as "Elbow Control".

And to take it a step further........ an old martial arts saying was "He who controls the elow controls the warrior".

Police officers are taught a "Straight Arm-Bar"....... some officers are successful and some are not while trying to take a person to the ground and "control/restrain" them. The officers that are successful have learned to control the elbow with the "technique". Nothing majical or mystical.

One of the guys that trains with me is 6'08 and weighs 440lbs. We get to use him for our escape training. He is one who helps us learn if something works or doesn't.

Look back in here(the training section of the forums) ......... I wrote an article on elbow control in an ambulance.

If a person trains regularly in martial arts or DT, I offer hints on documentation and ways to read body language and how to put their techniques into their "tactics".
 
emskyusho said:
(Sorry about the "10-post rule"; I was not aware.)
Click to expand...

This thread was allowed by the Community Leaders because we fully expected this type of open discussion. I would suggest, however, that everyone take a deep breath before posting to this thread again as it seems emotions are starting to become strained.
 
Wow.

I'm learning some intresting stuff here.I like the phrase "elbow control" Kip... it really easily expalins it. When I was taught "self protection measures" and then handcuffing (PATH) - joint control was a big thing... it is AMAZING how one can make someone cooperate with them just by holding their hand (in a certian fashion... escort holds, etc).

Jon
 
Obviously, Spindoctor came on board to counter the criticism of EMSKYUSHU's program. I have no problem with that, however, he missed the gist of the discussion. DT4EMS has a point from his position as a trainer/provider of medical services. My point comes from someone who regularly makes decisions on what will and will not be formerly taught to my team/department members. As a long time police/security trainer and martial artist myself, I try to remember the following: When your life is on the line, anything you do is acceptible if there are "exigent and articulable circumstances." In those other 99 percent of cases where you must control or restrain a patient, there needs to be guidelines and protocols that pass the test of LEGAL, ETHICAL and MORAL. Toss in the medical implications of techniques, and we have a whole new set of problems that must be negotiated. I regularly teach attacking motor points and nerve bundles for specific situations. I also understand the limitations that those techniques have. In a close quarters situation, what is known as fighting in the space of a phone booth, relying on pain compliance can prove fatal. I have personally broken a subjects wrist while attempting to control him. The guy never let up once and until he was in cuffs and being transported to his temporary living quarters, did he mention that his wrist felt a little sore and that maybe I could get someone to look at it when we get to the jail. Damn if wasn't broken. Was it a viable technique that got him under control? Sure, but it was in combination with many other things. Had I relied on an outside wrist lock, in both practice as well as my after action reporting, I would have either been hurt physically by him, or legally by my own agency.

My long winded point is that I don't think that you can teach magic techniques in an 8 hour seminar, nor should you market those techniques to a population that will have little, if any, follow up training. Let's face it; Medics are healers first and warriors second.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Position Paper

THis is what I was talking about in regards to "Patient Restraint".

I have been in contact with Dr. Kupas. I told him some of my concerns about the NAEMSP taking such a position.......... becasue rarely there are 5 people in the back of the ambulance.

I believe they based a lot of their position from the studies of Charly Miller and Restraint Asphyxia/Exited Delirium.

I also expressed my concern of the short comment of "reasonable" force/actions to defend (self-defense) when the medic/EMT has to use force.

I have also been in contact with Anne Maggorie who wrote the last JEMS article about "Striking a patient is nevre warranted". The case she cited was a good one. She is going to write another article on how EMS CAN DEFEND THEMSELVES.

Anyway here is the position paper. I hope it helps where the "5" comes in. Because as Jerry pointed out......... if you do something that is different than what admin believes........you are putting your own butt on the line.

http://www.naemsp.org/pdf/restraint.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sure if I wanted to invest hours and hours of training and learn martial arts that I just might have another tool in my arsenal that may come in handy some day. Not saying martial arts wouldn't be useful, just saying I'm not willing to invest in a whole new skill set.

Perhaps its merely an asset from a dysfunctional childhood but I've been able to sweet talk most of the uncoopertative pts into compliance. For some reason, they like me:rolleyes:

The truly violent, combative are 'convinced' by LEO's and handed over to me in restraints.

Martial arts may work beautifully, but I'm not learning a new skill when my current set is accomplishing what I need it to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top