Edged Weapon Defense: Is or was the 21-foot rule valid? (Part 2)

Status
Not open for further replies.

gunsmith

member
Joined
May 8, 2003
Messages
5,906
Location
Reno, Nevada
http://www.policeone.com/writers/columnists/ForceScience/articles/113907/

Edged Weapon Defense: Is or was the 21-foot rule valid? (Part 2)

Part 2 of a 2-Part Series

EDITOR'S NOTE: For the record, the 21-Foot Rule, when accurately stated, says that in the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with an edged weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet. Thus, when dealing with an edged-weapon wielder at anything less than 21 feet you need to have your gun out and ready to shoot before he starts rushing you or else you risk being set upon and injured or killed before you can draw your sidearm and effectively defeat the attack.

In Part 1 of this special series we reported on how the 21-Foot Rule, one of the core training components of edged-weapon defense, stands up when assessed against landmark findings about action-reaction times documented by the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato. We explained:

1. Because of misinterpretation, the 21-Foot Rule has been dangerously corrupted, but

2. When properly understood, the Rule is still valid in certain circumstances.

Now in this final installment of our 2-part series we discuss additional conclusions regarding edged-weapon defense, namely:

3. For many officers and situations, a 21-foot reactionary gap is not sufficient.

4. Weapons that officers often think they can depend on to defeat knife attacks can't be relied upon to protect them in many cases.

5. Training in edged-weapon defense should by no means be abandoned.

Here's what FSRC's executive director and selected members of the Center's National and Technical Advisory Boards have to say on these topics:

3. MORE DISTANCE. "In reality, the 21-Foot Rule--by itself--may not provide officers with an adequate margin of protection," says Dr. Bill Lewinski, FSRC's executive director. "It's easily possible for suspects in some circumstances to launch a successful fatal attack from a distance greater than 21 feet."

Among other police instructors, John Delgado, retired training officer for the Miami-Dade (FL) PD, has extended the 21-Foot Rule to 30 feet. "Twenty-one feet doesn't really give many officers time to get their gun out and fire accurately," he says. "Higher-security holsters complicate the situation, for one thing. Some manufacturers recommend 3,000 pulls to develop proficiency with a holster. Most cops don't do that, so it takes them longer to get their gun out than what's ideal. Also shooting proficiency tends to deteriorate under stress. Their initial rounds may not even hit."

Beyond that, there's the well-established fact that a suspect often can keep going from momentum, adrenalin, chemicals and sheer determination, even after being shot. "Experience informs us that people who are shot with a handgun do not fall down instantly nor does the energy of a handgun round stop their forward movement," states Chris Lawrence, team leader of DT training at the Ontario (Canada) Police College and an FSRC Technical Advisory Board member. Says Lewinski: "Certain arterial or spinal hits may drop an attacker instantly. But otherwise a wounded but committed suspect may have the capacity to continue on to the officer's location and complete his deadly intentions."

That's one reason why tactical distractions, which we'll discuss in a moment, should play an important role in defeating an edged-weapon attack, even when you are able to shoot to defend yourself.

"When working with bare-minimum margins, any delay in an officer responding to a deadly threat can equate to injury or death," reinforces attorney and use-of-force trainer Bill Everett, an FSRC National Advisory Board member. "So the officer must key his or her reaction to the first overt act indicating that a lethal attack is coming.

"More distance and time give the officer not only more tactical options but also more opportunity to confirm the attacker's lethal intention before selecting a deadly force response."

4. MISPLACED CONFIDENCE. Relying on OC or a Taser for defeating a charging suspect is probably a serious mistake. Gary Klugiewicz, a leading edged-weapon instructor and a member of FSRC's National Advisory Board, points out that firing out Taser barbs may be an effective option in dealing with a threatening but STATIONARY subject. But depending on this force choice to stop a charging suspect could be disastrous.

With fast, on-rushing movement, "there's a real chance of not hitting the subject effectively and of not having sufficient time" for the electrical charge--or for a blast of OC--to take effect before he is on you, Klugiewicz says.

Lewinski agrees, adding: "A rapid charge at an officer is a common characteristic of someone high on chemicals or severely emotionally disturbed. More research is needed, but it appears that when a Taser isn't effective it is most often with these types of suspects."

Smug remarks about offenders foolishly "bringing a knife to a gunfight" betray dangerous thinking about the ultimate force option, too. Some officers are cockily confident they'll defeat any sharp-edged threat because they carry a superior weapon: their service sidearm. This belief may be subtly reinforced by fixating on distances of 21 or 30 feet, as if this is the typical reaction space you'll have in an edged-weapon encounter.

The truth is that where edged-weapon attacks are concerned, "close-up confrontations are actually the norm," points out Sgt. Craig Stapp, a firearms trainer with the Tempe (AZ) P.D. and a member of FSRC's Technical Advisory Board. "A suspect who knows how to effectively deploy a knife can be extremely dangerous in these circumstances. Even those who are not highly trained can be deadly, given the close proximity of the contact, the injury knives are capable of, and the time it takes officers to process and react to an assault.

"At close distances, standing still and drawing are usually not the best tactics to employ and may not even be possible." At a distance of 10 feet, a subject is less than half a second away from making the first cut on an officer, Lewinski's research shows. Therefore, rather than relying on a holstered gun, officers must be trained in hands-on techniques to deflect or delay the use of the knife, to control it and/or to remove it from the attacker's grasp, or to buy time to get their gun out. These methods have to be simple enough to be learned by the average officer.

Two techniques that bear reinforcement are illustrated in the well-known training video "Surviving Edged Weapons", for which Gary Klugiewicz was a technical consultant. One is a deflection technique called Sweep and Disengage. The other is a tactic for controlling the attacker's weapon hand, called by the acronym G.U.N. (Grab...Undo...Neutralize).

Stapp strongly believes that training in edged-weapon defense should prepare an officer to deal psychologically with getting cut or stabbed, a realistic probability with lag time, close encounters and desperate control attempts. "Officers need to be trained to continue to fight," Stapp says. "They will not have time to stop and assess how severe the wound is. You don't want them in the mind-set, 'I've been cut, I'm going to die.' They must remain focused on stopping the attack, taking out the guy who is the threat to them."

Checking yourself over for injury after the offender is subdued is important, too, Klugiewicz says. "Some survivors of edged-weapon attacks report that they were not aware of being cut or stabbed when the injury occurred. They thought they had just been punched and didn't realize what really happened until later."

5. TRAINING. "Assuming it is presented accurately and in context with the many variables that shape knife encounters, the 21-Foot Rule can be a valuable training aid," Lewinski says. "As a role-playing exercise, it provides a dramatic and memorable demonstration of how fast an offender can close distance, and it can motivate officers to improve their performance skills."

Experiment with it and you may conclude, like Delgado, that 21 feet is not enough of a safety margin for your troops.

You might also use 21-Foot Rule exercises to test tactical methods for imposing lag time on offenders in order to buy more reaction time for officers. These could range from using or creating obstacles (standing behind a tree or shoving a chair between you and the offender) to moving yourself strategically. You're probably familiar with the Tactical L, for example, in which an officer moves laterally to a charging offender's line of attack. With the right timing, this surprises and slows the attacker as he processes the movement and scrambles to redirect his assault, and gives the officer opportunity to draw and get on target.

Lewinski favors a variation called the Tactical J. Here, instead of moving 90 degrees off line, the officer moves obliquely forward at a 45-degree angle to the oncoming offender. "This tends to be more confusing to the suspect and requires more of a radical change on his part to come after you," Lewinski says. "But the timing has to be such that the suspect is fully committed to his charge and can't readily adjust to what you've done. That takes lots of practice with a wide variety of training partners."

If nothing else, training with the 21-Foot Rule will help officers better estimate just how far 21 feet is. Without a good deal of practice, most can't accurately gauge that distance, Lewinski says, and thus tend to sabotage appropriate defensive reactions.

Don't forget, though, that most edged-weapon attacks are "up close and personal." That means training must include effective empty-hand-control techniques, close quarters shooting drills and weapon retention. "We need to develop the ability to draw our sidearm, get on target and GET HITS extremely fast," while moving as a diversionary measure if possible, says Stapp. "Close-range shooting--under 10 feet--will most effectively be accomplished when an officer has developed the ability to get on target 'by feel,' without using his sights."

Lewinski also recommends drills to imprint rapid reholstering techniques. Reholstering may become necessary if there's a sudden change in threat level--say the offender throws his weapon down and is no longer presenting an imminent threat justifying deadly force--and the officer needs both hands free to deal with him.

There's little doubt that the "knife culture" and related attacks on officers are dangerously flourishing. Edged-weapon assaults are a staple of the news reports of police incidents from across the U.S. and Canada on the website of FSRC's strategic partner, PoliceOne.com. Recently an officer in New York City was slashed in the face during a fight that broke out on a man-with-a-gun call...in Ohio, a state trooper fatally shot a berserk motorist who charged him with a hatchet...another offender, who called 911 in Pennsylvania to report he was having a heart attack, ended up shot 13 times and killed after commands and OC failed to stop him from lunging at a trooper with a chain saw...in Calgary (Ont.) a blood-soaked man waved a bloody butcher knife over his head and charged at constables who responded to a domestic...a suspected rapist attacked a Chicago detective with a screwdriver after luring him into an interrogation room by asking for a cigarette...in the reception area of a California prison, an inmate serving time for trying to kill a cop stabbed a correctional officer to death with a shank...in Idaho, an out-of-control teenager punched holes in the walls of his house with a 15-inch bayonet, then turned on a responding officer with the blade and sliced his uniform before the cop shot him....

"Given today's environment, rather than draw back on edged-weapon training, officers and agencies should be expanding it," Lewinski declares. "Edged-weapon attacks are serious and should be taken seriously by trainers, officers and administrators alike. Finding out what works best in the way of realistic tactical defenses and then training those tactics as broadly as possible has never been more needed."

FSRC is currently involved in additional research on the dynamics of edged-weapon confrontations and plans a major report on its findings before the end of this year.

Related stories:

Part 1 of the series

Nev. Deputy Shoots Knife-Wielding Man

New Orleans Police Shoot Man Waving a Cleaver

NOTE: Three courses for trainers on edged-weapon defense are offered through the new PoliceOne Training Network, in conjunction with the national training division of Fox Valley Technical College: Basic and Master Edged Weapon Instructor training, taught by Dave Young, and the Tactical Weapon Control Instructor course, taught by Gary Klugiewicz. For more information

(c) 2005: Force Science Research Center, www.forcescience.org. FORCE SCIENCE is a registered trademark of The Force Science Research Center, a non-profit organization based at Minnesota State University, Mankato.
 
Can someone show me a police department that issues tap measures to their officers ??....Often bureaucrats turn 'approximate' into rule !
 
21 foot rule of thumb

As pointed out it's not a law of science or codified rule, yet many folks forget that and treat it as such. Thanks for the history lesson. I hope it clears some of the silliness up on this issue.
 
Mete and hso raise good points.

From my perspective, 21 feet is very generous anyway. In my experience, a real attack isn't really conducted, announced, or able to be anticipated at that distance or greater. Most of the times I've been in "situations" have been well within 8-10 feet, usually closer to 3 feet. I suppose the only times I've ever felt threatened at a longer distance is from aggressive dogs who don't have the sense to conceal their intended actions. And when dogs start carrying knives, I'll probably check into the looney bin.
 
1. Because of misinterpretation, the 21-Foot Rule has been dangerously corrupted,

This is key. When Dennis Tueller developed the "Tueller Drill" he wasn't trying to create the so-called "21 foot rule." He was trying to show that a suspect armed with a knife was dangerous even if he wasn't within the immediate striking distance of the officer.

At that time the theory was that if the suspect with a knife was OUTSIDE of arms length, the officer was NOT in "serious danger of death or grave bodily harm" and the officer's use of deadly force was NOT justified. The thinking was that since a knife was a contact weapon, if the officer was outside of contact range, he was safe.

Tueller developed his drill to show that officers should consider a knife weilding suspect to be dangerous even if he was outside of arms reach. He found that most people could travel about 21 feet before an officer oculd draw and fire two shots. That doesn't mean that any distance under 21 feet was automatically lethal and any distance over 21 feet was automatically safe. It's just a simple "rule of thumb."
 
The Tueller Drill…sometimes good ideas get lost in fame. The Tueller drill was designed to show officers that a suspect with a knife that was within 21 feet was deadly threat and that officers should have their weapon already drawn in these situations. The Tueller drill also demonstrated so an an officer could see that if they did what they were previously taught to do…stand and attempt to speed draw the suspect with the knife would be able to close the 21 feet and get to them before they could draw and fire.

The problem I see with the current training is the shooter is ready for the drill and moves the second the suspect starts his charge. The suspect with the knife most of the time is told run in a straight line and does not track the officer as he would in real life. This type of training does not allow the officer to learn the techniques correctly because if you start moving to soon the suspect will track you. The object of the drill is to teach officers how to counter a suspect with a knife if charged. The way I was taught was to allow the suspect to close just like they would in a real situation and when he gets to about 10 feet from you sprint forward at approximately 45 degree. You make a conscience thought to move your feet first and then draw your weapon. You should pass the suspect just out of arms reach even if they attempt to track you. Your draw should be accomplished prior to passing the suspect and you shoot them just before and as they pass and if you miss by some chance, you can circle around behind them.

However, reality says that most incident do not include knife wheeling chargers from a distance. Those that want something from you are not going to banish their knife at 21 feet especially the lazy out of shape felons. It then becomes a contest of who is faster.

The real threat is when a person with a knife gets in close. There are usually two venues the knife is out and you don’t see it or the knife is drawn when in close. Things do not happen in a vacuum and bad guys with knives and guns do not suddenly appear. This is the reason why situational awareness and threat identification are so important.

Most encounters include the suspect wanting something and/or indicating both verbal and non-verbal indicators that they want to cause you harm. The rule to remember is if they can hit you, they can stab you …so distance is your friend.

If it is a robbery at knifepoint, then they will instruct you to do things and it is at this point you have the opportunity to counter the suspect with H2H techniques or drawing your firearm and shooting them. Bullets do not instantly stop determined suspects so be prepared to fire until they drop and to employ H2H and move while you firing to keep them from stabbing you. Most people are unaware of how much damage a sharp knife can cause and how much you will bleed when you are cut.

It is hard to counter someone that wants to simply kill you. Especially if they make it close with the knife drawn and undetected. This will most likely, resemble a prison shanking. The only real counter once it has begun is H2H techniques and fight for life.
 
I'v been through the current LE training on edged weapons - good as it is there is no training that will prepare you for an actual encounter with a crazed whack-job with a knife(or a screw driver for that matter) I have had several encounters in the last few years with people armed with edged weapons. Most ended peacibly. The sad thing is I have never been confronted by someone with a knife, that wasn't within the 21 foot distance - Most were within 15. The one that almost ended up with me being stabbed happened in less then 5 feet. I wasn't prepared for the attack and to this day dont know why I wasn't cut - The whole incident happened in a room that was quite small - we ended up in a short stand-off with him with about 10ft distance - not the way things are supposed to go and not the way things go during the training scenerio. Sadly alot of training now-days goes into using secondary weapons - even against lethal threats like knifes or axes - I have learned the hard way that leathal force needs to be met with leathal force - I would rather be judged by 12 then carried by six- pepper spray and tasers just dont work everytime. Anyone involved in an edged encounter should keep in mind that no matter what distance is recomended it isn't enough. 20 ft - 30 ft - personally i would rather have 50 - its a matter of being prepared mentally - Also - PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE drawing from your daily carry holster. If you do the gun will just appear in the your hand - I have seen too many people fumble when it comes time to pulling their gun(LE's included) I could cover 50ft with a knife in the time it takes some people to just unsnap a holstered gun, let alone draw and fire.

Anyway- enough rambling - This subject is quite interesting and I would like to hear from others who have been involved in edged encounters - For me its quite personal. I learned alot from past mistakes and hope to continue to practice better tactics in the future. I am thankful every day for having survived on luck in the past - sometimes luck is all you have on your side.
Great topic - lets hear from others who have opinions on the subject!
 
The 21 ft "rule" has always intreged me. I've tried to imagine how this could ever be applicable to everyday living. I would suppose that you could be walking down a dark alley some night and see someone 21 ft away. Then I suppose you could see this person pull his knife or bolo and charge. As others have said it is simply a training drill to make a point. Real encounters happen at arms reach and if your lucky while the attacker is still infront of you. My luck has not always been that good. I was slashed once in a bar filled with people. The attacker simply slapped me on the back as I walked by. That is more likely what you may face, and think about it. How could you avoid such an attack other than not be there?

Jim
 
Last edited:
Jim,

I definitely feel the same way as you. The only way you can really avoid the situation you outlined would be to anticipate the attack. For example, was the slasher looking at you frequently during the evening? Were you having a lot of fun? Did you have attractive women around you? Did you play a completely rockin' set? (IIRC you're a musician) Did you exchange words? Was he already POed at you from an earlier incident, etc.

Guys in bars usually attack when you're having a lot of fun and they're hating life. I've had this happen numerous times since I usually hit the bars with very attractive young ladies. (All my male friends just want to sit at my house, drink beer, and play XBox 360! haha) Not too long ago, I had a guy get in my face because I was out with 4 girls and none of them wanted to dance with him; they wanted to dance with each other or me. We were having way too much fun, he got shutdown, he thought it might be a good idea to get in my face. The funny thing was that my two buddies who are bodybuilders had just found me in the bar. So this guy steps up to the plate and tries to stare me down (he was about 5'6", 120 lbs, foreign, and didn't look like he had ever had dirt on his hands...completely terrifying lemme tell ya) and my two buddies step in behind me and say, "Hey Dan, who the hell is this guy?" Simply classic. Of course he backed down and at that point we all left for the evening.

So what does that have to do with the Tueller Drill? My point is that I was watching the guy and realized he would go from a rejected dance partner to aggressive. He kept staring at us, smoking cigarettes, pointing me out to his friends, and he also made a rude comment to my friend Ashley when she went by to use the ladies room. But the problem was that he was inside 21' the entire evening. His table was close to ours and also close to the dance floor. I really wasn't certain that he was even walking towards me until about 6'; but at least I had observed his earlier signs of a potential aggressor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top