More on OFFICER.com
Download the May/June issue of OFFICER Magazine.
Click Here to subscribe to OFFICER Magazine.
By Jim Klauba, Chicago Police Department (Ret.), ASP Trainer since 2011
ASP integrated training is principle-based. Its protocols and elements are centered around reasonableness, which is the standard commonly applied to use of force analysis. At times, however, some instructors struggle to explain some of these principles—which can be problematic when talking to a student, administrator, force review panel, or especially when in court. It’s critical that anyone teaching (and/or inevitably employing) defensive tactics be able to explain not only the techniques, but the reasoning behind them.
When asked, “Officer, why do we (insert tactic here)?” The most common answers passed down through generations of DT Instructors are along the lines of: “We have always done it this way.” or “That’s what’s on the lesson plan.”
Those remarks clearly don’t reflect much expertise on the part of the Instructor. Lesson plans, general orders and SOPs change all the time (that was certainly the case in my old department). So the lesson here is, you must truly understand what you are teaching—beyond superficially—and if the principles you teach are rooted in reasonableness, they will withstand scrutiny over time. As examples, here are a few specific questions that ASP Trainers are commonly asked while teaching Instructor Certification classes:
Why do you teach hitting an attacker twice with the baton (Double Weapon Strike)?
The Double Weapon Strike is a combination of two basic weapon strikes. Since the baton is a defensive weapon, a single strike during a sudden attack (such as a wild punch or flurry of punches) may not stop the attack entirely or prevent subsequent attacks. The principle behind the Double Weapon Strike is the “overload principle”—which says that multiple strikes to the same side of a subject’s body can overload or disrupt the attack, so the officer can gain an advantage. The officer can create distance, evaluate the situation, establish control and apply restraints.
Remember, the goal of a physical confrontation is control. In the case of the baton, having multiple strikes/ techniques at his disposal gives the officer options. Limiting an officer to only one technique at a time may make control more difficult, or worse, may increase the risk of officer injury.
Why do you swing the baton from the shoulder… won’t you hit the head?
All ASP techniques are performed from the same stance. That stance doesn’t change, whether employing empty hand techniques, using an open or closed baton, handcuffing, or even using the tactical flashlight. From that base, the baton is swung on a downward 45 degree angle (from the officer’s shoulder toward his opposite hip). The target is the center mass of the subject’s weapon delivery system—most often the attacker’s arms (punches) or legs (kicks). The 45 degree angle strike intercepts these attacks, while being highly forgiving in terms of the need for precision. This increases opportunities to establish control, with a lower potential for critical or lethal injury. After striking, the baton is returned to the combat position on the officer’s shoulder, while readiness in the basic stance is maintained.
Using the sound mechanics of proper stance and angled delivery of the strike—coupled with other fundamentals of power generation—will all help to minimize the risk of striking a non-target area, especially the head.
Why do you handcuff with your weapon hand? I cuff with my non-dominant hand, in case I have to access my firearm.
We get this question a lot, especially at ASP Instructor Certification (AIC) courses. The most common (and in our view and experience, the best) practice is handcuffing with the dominant hand. Handcuffing is fine motor skill, and applying restraints properly, whether under stress or not, is difficult for some officers. Using the dominant hand reduces the difficulty.
If it becomes necessary to move to lethal force during the handcuffing process, we employ a principle we call “Cease to Exist.” This simple concept trains officers to discontinue a given tactic when there is a need to disengage—especially when escalating the force option. Understanding the principles behind the techniques, committing them to memory and being able to teach them to others is critical in the development of any trainer or instructor.
Reprinted with permission of ASP Inc.
Training Principles vs. Training Techniques
If you’ve done much Defensive Tactics (DT) training, you’ve probably heard trainers or instructors say things like “Our program teaches principles,” or “We’re principle-based,” or the extra-impressive “We use principles of science.” (That last one probably just means gravity and leverage—but hey, it sounds great). Whatever the wording, in my many years in the LE training world, I have found that the term “principles” is often misused.
In the context of defensive tactics, a principle is the overarching concept that guides decision-making during a confrontation. A strong tactical principle is timeless and versatile—that is, it’s applicable to a variety of situations and scenarios. A technique, on the other hand, is the method or movement used to apply that principle. Understanding this difference is crucial when building your department’s lesson plans.
Students who grasp principles can adapt effectively under pressure— even if a specific tactic or technique doesn’t go as planned. In ASP training, we refer to this adaptability as “forgiving technique,” meaning it is:
• Easy to recall under stress
• Applicable in many situations
• Effective for any officer—regardless of age, athleticism, or experience
• Flexible in sequence
• Suitable for all environments
Principles also tend to be easier to remember than trying to recall hundreds of individual techniques. There’s a good comparison to be made with music: someone who memorizes chords can play some songs… but a musician who understands music theory can play anything.
A real-world example: safe separation
Take the principle of safe separation— establishing and maintaining two arms’ length distance from a subject during an interview. An officer may need to create this space quickly if a subject becomes aggressive. But when we talk about creating distance with officers in a training environment, the conversation often devolves to:
“Well, I would do this…”
“I train to do that…”
“If he moves left, I do this. If he moves right, I do that…”
And so on. An endless cycle of ideas and opinions and pointsof-view on tactics, while the foundational principle—controlling distance—gets lost.
Again, a principle explains what matters and why it matters. A technique is how that principle is manifested in action. In the case of training safe separation, We teach three simple forgiving techniques (as outlined above) to turn this principle into action.
It doesn’t matter the tactic— the principle remains the same
ASP teaches a way—not the only way. What we’ve learned is that training must be safe and scalable. Whether you’re teaching 100 students or just one, your principles need to be sound and your techniques need to work. They must also be proven on the street and court-defensible. And you shouldn’t need months or years to master them. In-service time is limited. Use it wisely.
When designing your DT lesson plans, start with the principle you want to emphasize. Support it with effective, easy-to-learn techniques to drive that point home.
For more ASP Trainer Talk, visit: asp-usa.com/blogs/trainer-talk For information on ASP Training visit: asp-usa.com/pages/training-programs
