[skidmark]

Here is your chance to influence the training and behavior of law enforcement regarding the use of force. www.responsetoresistance.com

This is a legitimate survey in an attempt to define "reasonable" in the use of force. So far, the numbers disagreeing with the proposed scenario responses are very small.

Warning: you will be asked to provide demographic information (age, weight, height, geographic location) before you can get to the survey. The site will accept anything you enter, as long as the blank is filled in, so tinfoil hat wearers need not freak about black helicopters being dispatched.

stay safe.

skidmark

[ilbob]

I thought it was an extremely deceptive survey. It appears to be an attempt to lump non-violent actions in with violent actions, and then using the responses from the survey to justify violent responses to such non-violent action. It also lumps in techniques that are far and away more dangerous with more Innocent techniques.

For instance,

If the subject is not attempting to harm the officer or others, but resists by using the weight of his body, or if a subject pulls away from the officer’s grasp, is it reasonable for the officer to attempt the following?
Any technique from the first segment
Joint Manipulations or Pressure Points (techniques that have little chance of injury)
Take Downs
Striking Muscle Mases (designed to cause cramping or a “Charlie Horse”)

IMO, the two scenarios presented are not at all similar. The ONLY appropriate technique in the case of mere dead weight resistance is to gently carry them away, which is not even mentioned. The survey is trying to make it appear that dead weight resistance is akin to an attempted escape.

Nothing like a survey that advocates beating the crap out of a non-violent protester.

[Jdude]

Nothing like a survey that advocates beating the crap out of a non-violent protester.

I stopped before the test finished because of this. perhaps it al made sense in the end, but I agree: cuff and carry. No need to beat the crap out of someone for laying there.

[Sergeant Sabre]

Many LE agencies' use-of-force policies are modeled around a system created by a company called Pressure Point Control Tactics, or PPCT. Every agency in my area abides by the findings of PPCT. The PPCT system is effective when used correctly, and minimized the chance of permanent or serious injury to a subject.

PPCT breaks every subject action down into categories, and breaks down every possible police reaction into categories. The appropriate reaction category is then matched to the appropriate subject action category to create a use-of-force continuum.

A "dead weight" action by a subject falls into PPCTs "inactive resistance" category. The proper police response category does not allow any striking whatsoever. It advocates the use of specific pressure points such as the mandibular angle (my favorite :D), infra-orbital, and hypoglossal, to gain compliance.

Police used to do the "cuff and carry". It was found to be far too labor-intensive to be practical in many situations, and exposed the "dead weight" to the danger of being dragged across pavement or dropped, causing injury.

PPCT doesn't get to the level of "beating the crap" out of somebody until they display what they call "active aggression", which means actively fighting with and trying to injure the officer.

The correct answer in the question is "B". Even so, striking one's common peroneal nerve (outside of the thigh, the "charlie horse") with my knee could hardly be considered "beating the crap of out somebody"

[Deavis]

how much force is reasonable?

The minimum amount that gets the job done, next.

[ilbob]

Police used to do the "cuff and carry". It was found to be far too labor-intensive to be practical in many situations, and exposed the "dead weight" to the danger of being dragged across pavement or dropped, causing injury.
Possibly true in a mass protest situation, but that was not the scenario presented.

I can't even imagine we have gotten to the point where it is acceptable practice to use pain to force compliance on a non-violent subject. Let him lay on the ground handcuffed for a while and he may well change his mind.

The early part of the force continuim seems oriented to justification of more force than is truly necessary and playing to egos that have been bruised.

Once you get to the actively fighting the cop part, I say all gloves are off and the offender gets what he gets.

[armoredman]

We are taught to use the minimum amount of force neccesary to gain compliance. That's it, no specifics on exactly what to use against what. The Academy does teach a number of less than lethal strikes, moves, and countermoves.
As to passive resistance, well, I have helped carry more than one inmate to another location. We don't drag them, attack them, or anything else while in restraints. I did personally know one former LT who demoted himself to inmate for doing exactly that. We won't tolerate it and will use street charges against a staff member who does.

[TexasSkyhawk]

I can't even imagine we have gotten to the point where it is acceptable practice to use pain to force compliance on a non-violent subject. Let him lay on the ground handcuffed for a while and he may well change his mind.

The early part of the force continuim seems oriented to justification of more force than is truly necessary and playing to egos that have been bruised.

Once you get to the actively fighting the cop part, I say all gloves are off and the offender gets what he gets.

I think your observations paint a pretty good picture of the gulf that exists between civilians and police officers.

Having been a cop for over ten years, and now a civilian, I can clearly see both sides of the perspective.

I will defend the use of "pressure point/pain" tactics for dead-weight arrests, and will do so on the following points:

1. When I placed you under arrest, I had specific powers granted to me by the Department of Justice to ensure that you complied with my lawful orders. (Why do you think "resisting arrest" is a crime, after all?) Failure on the arrestee's part to comply with those orders were his problem, not mine, and my duty and obligation to was to ensure compliance. Our civil affairs division of the AG's office has defended that stance for decades.

2. I am placing the subject under arrest because I have reasonable suspicion and probable cause that a crime against the United States has been committed by the subject(s) I am arresting. The arrestee knows that the street is not a courtroom and that arguing his/her case will not change the status of the arrest. If you are completely innocent, call you an attorney once I have you down at my office and chances are good you'll be freed before I finish the report.

However, in over 300 federal felony arrests, not once did I ever arrest an innocent person. Usually just the opposite. Once we arested the subject, we began discovering a host of other crimes that person had committed.

3. If you refuse or resist arrest, you are now endangering me--even with passive resitance. In a protest situation with multiple protestors, resistance encourages others to resist. That presents a dangerous situation for the arresting officer. Sooner or later, someone is not going to be so passively resistant.

In the case of criminal tresspass where "sit-ins" occur, again, the protesters are breaking the law (and in almost ALL cases, KNOW they are breaking the law and getting arrested to "make a point"is the goal--along with media attention) and violating the property owner's rights. Do what the arresting officer/agent asks you to do, and there is NO NEED for pressure point/pain point techniques.

In the survey, I did state that I disagree with striking or hitting during a passive subject arrest. But I have no problem with an officer utilzing a "come along" hold to get a dead-weight arrestee off his/her ass and into the car or wagon. And when they resist, I'm all in favor of making sure the "resisting arrest" charge carries jail time.

Jeff

[cassandrasdaddy]

i am always amused at the armchair experts who pontificate about how someone shouild be made to comply during an arrest. i've seen a 95 pound girl be more than 4 200 pound cops could handle.
she looked like a sunday school teacher in court though. did i mention she ripped the toilet outa the floor she was cuffed to? and the 7 stitches in the cops hand where she bit him?
my standing offer is any two 200 pound heros of the revolution that wanna try i'l bet 500 bucks they can't cuff me a fat broken down old fart with me resisting only by pulling away and twisting. and they aree constrained to no hitting. my only caveat is when they fail and lose it and hit i get to hit back
get few takers and no ones ever got my money

[armoredman]

I have also seen a 120 pound female officer take down a 250 pound enraged inmate. Pressure points and take downs do work, as does OC and Taser, do a degree. Why would I endanger myself by fighting an individual on even terms if I don't have to? Before I'd send in an A team to try to take one someone in a forced cell move, I will go with less-than-lethal methods such as OC, pepperballs, taser, etc. Safer for everyone involved.