Training with Purpose

I remember being contacted several years ago by a department training coordinator that asked me about headgear for their officers. He told me they were having some injuries during training and asked me what I thought about a drill they were doing. He explained that both officers would have a flag on their ankle and the aim was to remove the flag from the other officer’s ankle during a grappling event, which he said caused several officers to have busted lips, which was most likely from elbows being thrown back to stop the other officer from pulling on the arm during the struggle. I asked him what was the purpose of the drill, and what was his department attempting to accomplish? I say this because we must have a clear goal of why we’re doing a drill or scenario, and it must relate to realistic situations that an officer may find himself or herself in on the street. We must also test the risk and reward of a drill or scenario to ensure the risk of the drill doesn’t outweigh the goal we’re wishing to achieve. Your department’s human resources personnel often looks at risk based on injury and doesn’t look at the training goal of your department and what you’re attempting to achieve as a trainer.

I distinctly remember one year at my agency where the person in human resources said: “Why can’t we put male officers with male officers and female officers with female officers to reduce the chances of injury?” She then suggested the officers should also be about the same size, which we all know is not realistic in the realm we operate in as police officers. I can’t blame her for making these statements because her intention is to reduce liability and risk by creating a safe environment for employees. This offered us an opportunity to have a dialogue with her in the importance of officers being able to experience different weight, body types, and strength levels just like they would on the street. This shows the importance of not only documenting the number of personnel that has been through your training without injury but also realizing the risk of having your training dialed down or even stopped because of what may be deemed as an unsafe training environment. The “knee jerk reaction” is often to stop a training program completely rather than examining how we can reduce chances of injury, but we often bring this on ourselves when we don’t examine our risk vs. reward.

I recall an academy where recruit officers being pitted against each other with gloves and headgear in what appeared to be a Kumite type situation and believe me both recruits weren’t holding back any punches. This event resulted in multiple injuries to recruits and sometimes decreased the likelihood of them graduating from the academy, and some injuries could haunt them continuously through their careers if they graduated. I believe in putting on headgear and being able to understand striking distance, clinch work, and timing, especially with accessible weapons on our belts. This controlled training can build success, but we must also realize the pitfalls of not having a controlled program. The success of a professional fighter is based on many factors that include being healthy enough to fight in the ring, therefore achieving the goal of winning, which means regulating their own training and potential injury is crucial to their success. I’ll revert to the previous scenario where recruits were fighting each other in front of the other recruits where you could hear the cheering for the winning officer similar to that of the Roman gladiators. We know that most academy cadets have never been in a physical encounter before entering the police academy and now they’re placed into the ring with often no knowledge of distance or blocking principals. This leads to an all-out melee with only one winner, and that can cause the officer to revert to their firearm on the street during a physical encounter because they have no confidence in their physical abilities as the looser of the bullpen scenario.

I believe in having scenarios where officers must fight in a physical encounter in a regulated environment with an instructor that looks at building the skill and confidence of the officer is much more impactful on learning and decision-making skills with weapon selection. The instructor coaches the officer during the encounter and builds confidence to succeed, leading to the officer having the confidence to engage on the street. We as trainers must be invested in the overall success of our officers by realizing that building self-confidence is as important or if not more important than that of any technique. We can have concepts of defense that create success when technique fails because we’ve built-in confidence through continuous and purposeful training.

We must also have the buy-in of our administrations that have the same focus as we do with the training provided, but I’ve seen some admins that don’t have an inkling of what is being taught in their own agencies because they themselves don’t attend this training to see how it is being implemented and received. The trainers themselves rarely have an open dialogue with their own administration about what is working in the field and what are the areas of overall improvement. This is just one reason we still have PowerPoint & Control Tactics being taught in police departments and police academies. The administrator assumes this is a practical and useful defense based system that works because they themselves were taught the same system with having no updated information on how it works in the field. We must continue to examine what we’re teaching and how we’re implementing training that mirror policy, law, and the overall goal of our agency. We often look at the video of an officer involved in a physical encounter that involves decision making and critique their response or lack thereof a response, not realizing many times these officers were inadequately trained or attended a checkoff box training event where the instructor of the agency didn’t care about what was being delivered. The training itself was just documentation to show they met the requirements to meet their department accreditation, and some agencies have failed to even keep up with that required standard. I truly believe it would amaze the public at the amount of training an officer receives once leaving the “basic” police academy, and we’re often seeing the results in the field for not training.

We often teach academy cadets how to use a taser, baton, pepper spray, etc… but we rarely give them a blueprint to know when and where to use these devices and now how to articulate the use of the device. The decision-making skills concerning these tools won’t somehow improve over the years if the officer doesn’t have continuous training that provides him or her with the ability to decide using these tools, which goes back to how we as trainers are providing training that officers can reasonably articulate. I remember being contacted several years ago by an officer that asked me if we provided an “online defensive tactics program?” My response was respectful, but I clarified that we don’t offer defensive tactics as an online program and never would. Most online training in most cases is a cheaper alternative to a checkoff box where we inside the agency really don’t know if they met the purpose and goal of the training, other than achieving a certificate that showed they attended.

So next time we examine an incident involving one of our fellow officers, we may want to consider the amount of training the officer has received and realize their perceived misgivings are most likely based on the lack of purposeful training. I wonder how many agencies are evaluating their own programs to see if what they’re teaching is being used in the field and the success rate of what is being taught. I know there is an improvement that is occurring because we’ve had officers attend our training that don’t have a program in place but is looking to implement one within the agency. I’m optimistic when I see these new trainers in our programs looking to gain knowledge and improve or start their own programs that meet the needs of today's officers. Implementing training at your agency is a tedious endeavor but worth the effort when you see a measurable response from officers that are now safer because of what you taught them. Please be safe and watch your six!

Author: Ray Beshirs

Blue Shield Tactical Systems LLC

Blueshieldtactical.com