Defense against blunt and edged weapons – a basic guide

Click here to watch video on Youtube

REDDIT DISCUSSION

This video covers unarmed defense against both blunt and edged weapons, highlighting the importance of understanding range to either deny attackers their advantage or impose our own.

Yes, you should never fight someone who is armed, and running away is a good idea. However, there are some scenarios where evasion isn’t an option and hand-waving comments like “just run away” do not help. Strategic positioning, range management and movement are the foundation of dealing with weapons.

We start with understanding the nuances of unarmed striking, the significance of maintaining an appropriate stance for mobility and reaction, and the concept of “lunging distance” which is critical for both offense and defense.

Then we move on to managing distances to either escape harm or close in, underlining that effective defense involves being either out of reach or too close for an attacker to utilise their weapon effectively.

The guide also touches on the specialised considerations for dealing with different types of weapons, from long and short blunt instruments to edged weapons, stressing the need for speed, control, and tactical awareness.

Some of the clips used in video

And here’s an extra:

Also, check out other videos categorised under weapon disarms on this website

The limits of pain compliance

Click image or click here to watch video

Pain compliance is quite literally the use of pain as a method to achieve compliance, and discourage resistance and aggressive behaviour. It’s an integral part of any police use of force continuum policies. However, its effectiveness varies greatly depending on the individual’s pain tolerance, mental state, and the intensity of the situation.

Individuals under the influence of drugs, experiencing a mental health crisis, or in a state of excited delirium might not respond as expected to pain compliance techniques. Adrenaline and other physiological factors can significantly diminish pain perception, leading to less effectiveness in gaining compliance and potentially escalating the situation to more extreme uses of force.

Pain compliance is not a substitute for physical control. It should not be seen as a primary strategy but rather a part of a broader set of tactics aimed at safely controlling and detaining individuals.

It’s crucial for law enforcement to have a clear objective when employing pain compliance and to be prepared to shift tactics if it’s not effective.

Continuous application of pain without gaining control can be perceived as excessive and lead to public scrutiny and distrust. In extreme cases, it can lead to serious injury and death, particularly when the subject is of poor health.

Training, skills, fitness and teamwork are the only answer.

The public’s perception of pain compliance is increasingly critical. With widespread access to information and a growing emphasis on police accountability, the use of force is under more scrutiny than ever. Law enforcement agencies need to ensure their personnel are well-trained in a variety of techniques, understand the implications of their actions, and are capable of making judicious decisions in the heat of the moment.

In conclusion, while pain compliance can be a part of law enforcement’s toolkit, it should be used judiciously and in conjunction with other tactics aimed at safely and efficiently resolving confrontations. Continuous training, public engagement, and a commitment to ethical practices are vital in maintaining public trust and ensuring the safety of both officers and those they serve.

The Norway Incident: Cop charged with assault after failing to control on the ground

Click image above or here to watch video

Bystanders and the court of public opinion

The failure of wristlocks and armbar takedowns

News coverage of the incident from Norway:

On October 30, Kevin Simensen, a 26-year-old man, was subjected to violence by the police. Initially, no one believed his account, but new surveillance footage has emerged that supports his claims.

The footage shows a police officer in his 30s repeatedly striking Simensen outside a gas station in Kongsberg. This video has gained significant attention recently. TV2 has also obtained another video that shows what happened immediately after the first surveillance footage. Simensen believes this second video was taken after he was pepper-sprayed and before his friend Kristian was hit with a baton.

Due to the surveillance footage, the case has taken a turn. The officer has been charged with violence and gross negligence in the line of duty. The police chief, Ole Sæverud, stated that the charged officer has not been in active duty since the video came to light.

Both Simensen and his friend Kristian Teigen appreciate the media attention the case is getting. They believe it’s crucial for people to realize that such incidents do happen in Norway. Teigen also mentioned that the police deleted some of the footage they had initially captured.

Simensen, who has been dealing with PTSD since the incident, is slowly reintegrating into society. He had previously served with NATO in the Mediterranean for six months.

The officer’s lawyer, Gry Schrøder Berger, stated that the video doesn’t show the entire sequence of events and that her client is currently struggling emotionally.

The case is now pending court evaluation.

https://www.tv2.no/nyheter/innenriks/ny-video-av-politivolden-foler-meg-makteslos/15697249/

The Buskerud District Court ruled that the officer’s use of force against Kevin Simensen was lawful. The officer had been accused of gross bodily harm after forcibly restraining Simensen, who was pepper-sprayed and hit multiple times with both a baton and a fist.

The ruling was not unanimous; one of the judges dissented, arguing that the officer’s actions were not in line with the police law’s guidelines on the use of force. The court’s majority opinion emphasized that Simensen did not cease resisting arrest and that the officer had little time to consider alternative actions.

The Special Unit for Police Affairs, which had been prosecuting the case, stated that they would review the court’s reasoning before deciding on whether to appeal. Kevin Simensen and his legal team expressed disappointment with the verdict, stating that it could further erode public trust in the legal system.

Ole Sæverud, the Police Chief in Kongsberg, has not yet commented on whether the acquitted officer will return to duty. He mentioned that the officer is currently suspended and that they would need to thoroughly review the verdict before making any decisions.

https://www.tv2.no/nyheter/innenriks/politimann-frikjent-i-kongsberg-saken/15877423/

Police shoot terrorist in Melbourne, Australia – two video angles

On 9 November 2018, one male attacker, Hassan Khalif Shire Ali, set his vehicle on fire and stabbed three people at Bourke Street in the Melbourne central business district, Australia, before being fatally shot by Victoria Police. Of the three victims stabbed by Ali, one of the stabbed victims died at the scene while the other two were treated by paramedics and taken to hospital.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Melbourne_stabbing_attack

One police officer attempts to disarm Ali with a baton, which is completely ineffective. His partner shoots Ali which stops the attack.

Man threatens another with baton, gets knocked out

The man holding the baton made some errors:

  • Allowed his opponent to close the distance when he had a tool which needs more range.
  • Range can be managed by movement – he’s completely stationary.
  • Flat posture, straight back, very likely standing with knees locked straight, does not appear to be in any kind of stance which would prepare him to respond in the split second required to move, defend or attack. His opponent constantly adjusts.
  • Allowed opponent to grip his wrist. Difficult to swing baton effectively when grappling starts. The grip even from this position may allow opponent to stay off-centre when the baton swing comes.
  • Furtive glance made by opponent is a huge warning sign. He has already decided to attack at this point and is looking for witnesses, other enemies or allies which may factor in to his decision to go ahead.
  • Even if he decided to use the baton, it’s a poor weapon. Law enforcement use this as a method of pain compliance, and often need to move to other methods when it fails. Striking the legs is unlikely to instantly shatter kneecaps unless you’re very lucky/unlucky to hit that spot. You’re only starting the fight, not ending it. Swinging to the head would be a different matter.
  • Compare the above (pain compliance) to the punches thrown to the head (incapacitation).

Baton man seems to think intimidation is enough to keep him safe. The baton is like some kind of force field, everything else can be ignored.

From this position, when would he decide to use it? Once the fighting starts? Too late, too close. When the man fails to step back? This may be considered unjustified assault. Baton man then made a threat to seriously harm, which prompted an aggressive response. He put himself in a situation which is very difficult to win.