The Tiananmen Massacre In Pictures

Remember June 4th 1989...Never take the freedom you have for granted

Introduction to Human Behavioral Biology

Awhile back we posted a lecture on Verbal Judo that alot of people seemed to really like. I ran across a series of lectures on youtube this one being the first of many. As for relevance to self defense I feel that in the fields of de-escalation and avoidance you have to also be a student of human behavior so any of the knowledge contained in the below lecture from Standford University could be helpful. - Paul Green

Weapons vs Willpower

 The following applies to both police and civilians equally at times I see outdated logic with both. The fact is that I know alot of people who still don't think unarmed combatives are important. They think if they carry a weapon if they get in trouble they can just use that. The truth is sometimes you can and sometimes you can't but you can't depend on it. Many officers are too reliant on their weapons and many concealed and carry civilians are the same way. This is a dangerous game your playing. The fact is even if you can get your weapon out in time(which you usually can't) and even on top of that if you hit the guy it still may not stop the attack. I see this myth in knife sparring all the time in so-called reality based self defense schools. I want to show you a couple videos just to illustrate my point. I do want to warn you these are very graphic.

 In the above video sadly a man was shot to death and we hope the scum responsible are brought to justice. Our condolences go out the the family who suffered this loss. What I do want to point out in this video however is that this man was shot in the head and continued to fight until another person intervened and he was finally killed with his own gun. One shot didn't top him. Two shots didn't stop him. He kept fighting even with a head wound. Even fighting on the ground to pull his weapon if that other person hadn't jumped in he may have gotten to it and survived. We see it all the time in airsoft training one shot one kill and there are hundreds of videos on the internet that show this isn't always the case. Of course the caliber of the gun will definitely have alot to do with it but one shot isn't always a kill. On the other side of this which is valuable when your training in self defense you need to know that just because you've been hit with a bullet doesn't always mean your dead. You need to keep fighting you could actually survive. I know many people who have been shot and lived to tell about it. Some unarmed training wouldn't have hurt his chances in the above video alot of time was lost trying to get to a weapon. Yes if the attacker is carrying a pocket canon and you get shot in the head it's going to be over more than likely but that isn't always the case either. Training should reflect these variables. I've seen criminals use sheer willpower to override TASER successfully and everything else. If you carry a gun you STILL need unarmed training and your delusional if you think otherwise no matter if your law enforcement or a civilian.

 This is a well known video from Thailand. Fortunately everyone survived this one. There's no telling how many times this security guard was stabbed yet he survived. I have several instructor friends that train with the Shock Knife. Looking at how they knife spar I really don't like it they get shocked once and stop. This is bad training and it isn't realistic. Now I've never been shot but I have been cut in a knife fight. When I used to work as a bouncer we had a scuffle one time in the club(well there were many scuffles in the club but this specific one)  and we threw a bunch of guys out and turned them over to the police. Late that night when I got home and was taking off my shirt  to take a shower I realized I'd been sliced open below my left shoulder blade. I didn't even know it when it happened I even had to get stitches though I can't remember how many it seems like it was 8 or 9. Most of the time when people find out they were stabbed afterward they say things like they thought they were being hammerfisted or something. This man was stabbed countless times and kept fighting and survived. The criminal attacking the guard was hit with pretty much everything but the kitchen sink and didn't even go down. One stab one kill in training doesn't get it so get real.

   In closing if you carry a weapon for whatever reason it isn't a valid replacement for unarmed training so do yourself a favor and get some. Just because you shoot someone or stab them doesn't mean they will stop fighting you. Just because you've been shot or stabbed it doesn't mean your necessarily going to die and it definitely doesn't mean your going to stop fighting for your life so if your training doesn't reflect these variables then you need to address it.

Nothing Works All The Time, Everything Works Sometimes

     Nothing works all the time, Everything works sometimes

                                                              - W. Hock Hocheim

    It's a very profound statement if you think about it. It's simple....but profound. It's the way a good technique should be if you really think about it. It has depth and can be used for more than one purpose and mean many things. I remember the first time I ever heard it in Decatur, AL a couple years ago at a clinic taught by Hock Hocheim, a mentor of mine. He say's it at the start of all his seminars. Now I'm one of these guys that thinks alot..probably too much. If I come up with a tactic I then try to come up with a counter. Then a counter to that until I can't even think of a counter anymore. This statement means a couple different things to me and I think everyone should learn it and understand it. Below I'm going to list a few ways that I apply this statement in my career and hopefully enlighten some to the value of it.

1. It's just flat out true - You take the craziest most unrealistic technique you ever saw and you can find someone on youtube being knocked out by it. However just because it works for one person doesn't mean it will work for everyone. As a police trainer I see this stuff all the time. I see some of the worst courses you could think of with the craziest things. However, you can go on the websites for these courses and there will be all kinds of testimonials from officers that used that system and it worked for them.As trainers and coaches if we are striving for the safety of those we teach it's best to use  tactics or concepts that are most likely to work for everyone consistently. That's our job. When people use these high risk low reward systems and they work it can keep bad systems around and make it harder to convince departments to upgrade to a better system even if that bad system is failing for everyone else. In a way for them it's about perspective. I had a meeting with a police chief locally a few months back. He had done one of these big national courses that in all honestly most departments are abandoning because of it's low success rate in the field. However he loved the course because he'd used a couple tactics from it that had saved his life in his career. He's spent 40 hours in that class and learned 4 or 5 really good techniques. Now to my ears that's evidence of a bad course not a good one to spend that much time in a class and 4 or 5 useful things is all you got but he was convinced. He was convinced because nothing works all the time, everything works sometimes and those times it worked for him. You may run into people sometimes that think they see a flaw in your system because of something in their background. If that happens and it will. Remember that statement and don't blow it off. Maybe what they are saying is unfounded but maybe since they came from a different background they see something that you missed. It could be a chance for your system to grow and have more depth so when someone else thinks they seem the same flaw you'll have an answer for them. Then again they may be full of crap but you should at least think about it.

2. It's a warning to the arrogant - The reality based self defense community can be filled with the most egotistical arrogant people in the world. They know the real truth about everything, but they are the only ones that know....yeah right. It would take 100 RBSD instructors to change a light bulb. 1 to actually do it and 99 to say they could've done it better and they'll have scientific studies to back it up too. They could go on for hours about how you should've tilted your hand more or applied more force when you pushed up and they'll make sure to unknowingly be as condescending as humanly possible when they do it. They just seem to have conveniently forgotten to never say never. The technique everyone seems to jump on is high kicks. Now I personally am not a fan of high kicks and I don't teach them. With my background being Jujutsu when I see that leg in the air I'm thinking their balance is mine. In the confrontations I've been in I make sure I stay too close however so I'm not in kicking range. That's my perspective but it doesn't mean they could never work. I think for the average person it's too high risk of a technique because of the position it puts you in. However someone like Bill Wallace could kick you in the head all day. I've grown to hate threads on boards and facebook groups. I rarely post in them anymore just for the simple fact that people love to take things out of context so they can jump on them and make themselves look more intelligent than others that are trying to do the same thing. It's transparent and it makes me angry. Throw a discussion about high kicking into one of those threads and it's like dumping blood in a shark tank. I would caution them to remember this statement. It'll keep you honest before you open your mouth. We preach all the time that attacks are random and we don't know who the attacker will be. If you preach it then you should apply it to all your logic. Once again high kicks have a very very low success rate but that doesn't mean that someone couldn't kick your beak around like Daffy Duck. To think that it could never happen is ignorant and could someday be your downfall. Not because someone might kick you in the head but that dismissive attitude will affect how you build your courses and how you apply your concepts as well as how you prepare others. Before you get on your lectern to pontificate remember the statement. Then remember that your not as smart as you think you are..

3. It's a disarming and diplomatic tool for trainers - I teach people from all kinds of backgrounds. Sure when I was younger I had a short sighted view of things like alot of these other guys around. However I always tried to be honest with myself and put the people I'm teaching first. When I go to teach a seminar I don't know the background of everyone that's in there. If I go in there with a dismissive attitude about certain martial arts bashing them and silly things like that and how this and that is BS then I'm blowing an opportunity. If someone from that style is their they are just going to shut down and tune me out. I'll never get through to them. You can't just go in there and talk to people that way and tell them something they've worked their butts off in is crap. If someone done that to me the first thing I'd think is this guy doesn't have much teaching experience he's too immature. You open your seminar with the statement it's diplomatic. You allow them to clutch the thing they hold onto and by not taking everything away from them you get their ear. If you have a better way and your a good teacher they'll find it on their own you don't have to say that stuff. Be diplomatic when they ask questions about how it fits in with the thing they do. Always be positive and helpful. Build....don't tear down. This gets back to the negativity and dismissive attitude sinking you. If you still want to be negative and are thinking well I don't want those idiots in my class... then your the idiot. You shouldn't be teaching because you don't care about the people you only care about your dogma. Remember the statement.

I want to thank Hock for making that statement and I hope this short article even though I probably went to deep and over thought it will enlighten some of you in a small way. Thank you for your time.

The Psychopathic Suspect by John Reid & Associates

Imagine what it would be like to make everyday decisions without caring how your choices affected others and to live each day with the only goal being to elevate your insatiable self-worth.* When telling lies or engaging in criminal activity you experience no guilt or remorse and you have such confidence in your ability to escape punishment that you lie at will; in fact, engaging in illegal behavior, and the thrill of getting away with it, becomes a driving force in your life allowing you to express superiority over others: Welcome to the mind of the primary psychopath.

Fortunately, less than one percent of the population is diagnosed as a primary psychopath.* The predominant traits that characterize this psychological disorder include lack of remorse or guilt, poor behavioral control, need for emotional stimulation,* irresponsibility, shallow affect, failure to learn from experience, and involvement in anti-social behavior, including frequent lying. Primary psychopaths are usually diagnosed in their twenties, tend to be male and have a higher than average IQ.** They experience a psychological burn-out by mid-life after which they are likely to be nonproductive members of society (incarcerated, drug addicts, recluses).

Statistically, an investigator is much more likely to encounter a secondary psychopath.* These are individuals who possess some psychopathic traits in combination with symptoms from other personality disorders or mental illness.* About fifty percent of the prison population is diagnosed as having some psychopathic traits.

Identifying the psychopath

An investigator is generally not concerned with exactly what mental illness a suspect suffers from, but rather how to recognize fundamental symptoms of a disorder and how to effectively deal with the suspect.* A suspect with psychopathic tendencies will exhibit several of the following behaviors:

1.* Glibness / superficial charm e.g., unconcerned attitude, overly polite, inappropriate levity

2.* Irresponsibility e.g., failure to meet financial obligations, failure to keep appointments, not following through on promises

3.* Reckless disregard of other's safety or feelings / lack of empathy e.g., irrationally shooting a customer during a robbery, purposefully aiming a car toward an animal trying to cross the road

4.* Pervasive engagement in anti-social behavior, e.g., lying, cheating, theft, fraud

5.* Impulsive behaviors, e.g., promiscuous sexual behavior, spontaneous crimes

6.* Feelings of entitlement, e.g., strive for positions of authority and power, expectation of special treatment (or claims of unfair treatment)

There are a number of key behaviors that may indicate a suspect has psychopathic tendencies.* The first is the suspect who, upon meeting the investigator, exhibits no fear or anxiety.* Rather, the suspect appears to almost enjoy the challenge of answering questions and does not present any outward symptoms of anxiety or guilt even when caught making an inconsistent or false statement.*

The suspect may engage in testing behavior shortly after meeting the investigator.* This concept comes from con men who would stage certain scenarios to test the gullibility of a potential victim.* Examples of testing behavior may include asking the investigator for a business card, to draw a map showing the best route to the freeway, or simply for the current time.* By engaging in this preemptive behavior, the suspect gains a sense of control during the interview.

Finally, it is not uncommon for psychopaths to falsify their credentials and even impersonate others.* When psychopathy is suspected, the investigator should question the suspect about his background, education, professional licenses and certification.* It may be productive to ask the suspect, "Have you ever pretended to be someone else, where you posed as another person?"

Interviewing The Psychopath   ***********

Because of the psychopath's high level of self confidence, he often believes that he does not need an attorney.* A psychopath is likely to waive his Miranda rights and agree to be interviewed.* During the interview he is easily engaged and appears to be helpful and cooperative.* In reality this "cooperative facade" allows the psychopath to manipulate the investigator with the intent to convince the investigator of his innocence.

The challenge in interviewing a psychopath is that, depending on the degree of psychopathy, the suspect may exhibit minimal behavior symptoms of deception when lying.* This includes the lack of specific nonverbal or paralinguistic behaviors reflecting anxiety, guilt, fear or low confidence.* Similarly, on the verbal level, the psychopath may not reduce anxiety by using memory qualifiers e.g., "to the best of my knowledge."*

In fact, psychopaths often tell bold lies that invite a challenge, e.g.,** "I had nothing to do with this whatsoever.* Iill give you my fingerprints because I know you won't find them at the crime scene."* Later, the investigator finds the suspect's fingerprints all over the crime scene.* Needless to say, when a suspect exhibits psychopathic traits the investigator should not take anything the suspect says at face value.* Rather, the investigator should carefully document the suspects alleged credentials or alibi, obtain exemplars, get blood sample, take fingerprints etc. and check everything out.

The psychopathis weakness is within his attitudes.* During an interview he will come across as unconcerned (inappropriate levity, express leniency toward the guilty party), offer unrealistic assessments of the crime, and express insincere emotions.* The predominant feature is the absence of anxiety or concern that is typically observed from innocent suspects.* Moreover, because psychopaths engage in spontaneous behavior, often there is clear evidence that places them at the crime scene or with the victim.* Of course, when confronted with the evidence, the suspect will have an explanation for the evidence and protest his innocence with a great deal of conviction.

Interrogating the Psychopath

Hard-wired within the psychopathis affected personality is a very high index of suspicion; psychopaths are incapable of fully trusting another human being and believe that everyone only acts in their own best interests.* Consequently, if the investigator attempts to come across as someone who understands the suspects' situation and can sympathize with the suspectis reasons for committing the crime, the investigator will lose credibility.*

Rather, the investigator should use a factual approach to the interrogation.* The investigators' statements should focus on evidence and attacking the suspect's credibility.* The investigator's demeanor should be professional, emotionally detached and confident.* It is rare for a primary psychopath to fully confess his crime.* More often, he will make incriminating statements and ultimately accept a plea bargain from the prosecutor n the psychopath will not fully admit wrong-doing, but may acknowledge that it is in his best interest to plead guilty.

In conclusion, investigators must guard against labeling every suspect who commits a despicable crime or who frequently lies as a psychopath.* While it is true that many people who commit crimes have psychopathic tendencies, certainly not all criminals are primary psychopaths.* Psychopathy occurs on a wide continuum.* Consequently, rather than asking, "Is this suspect a psychopath?" the investigator may be better off asking, " To what extent does this suspect exhibit psychopathic tendencies?"*

The more psychopathic tendencies a suspect exhibits, the less weight should be placed on specific behavior symptoms of truth or deception during the interview.* In fact, the focus of the interview should be to obtain detailed information, about the suspects' alibi, relationship with the victim, financial situation etc., and that information should be verified (or refuted).* The psychopath's guilt is usually revealed by detecting not one big lie, but several little ones.* Also, the interrogation approach should appeal less to the suspectis emotions and more to logic and intellectual arguments.

Credit and Permission Statement: This Investigator Tip was developed by John E. Reid and Associates Inc. Permission is hereby granted to those who wish to share or copy the article. For additional 'tips' visit www.reid.com; select 'Educational Information' and 'Investigator Tip'. Inquiries regarding Investigator Tips should be directed to Janet Finnerty johnreid@htc.net. For more information regarding Reid seminars and training products, contact John E. Reid and Associates, Inc. at 800-255-5747 or www.reid.com

How MMA Can Be Bad for Police Training

    As I make my way across the country I've seen an alarming trend. That trend being that officers are using MMA for DT training. MMA can teach you how to fight no doubt about it over time but it isn't right for what you do. There are huge inherent flaws in this type of training that will give you the wrong training for the wrong situation. Now before you jump my case you should know I've been doing Jujutsu for 34 years and hold a rank of 6th Dan. I trained with some of the earlier UFC fighters from back in the days when it was a tournament. I've worked the corner for US Title fights. I was backstage during some of the earlier UFC's watching guys like Oleg Taktarov, Ken Shamrock, and Fabio Gurgel prep for fights. I've been on the mat with Rickson Gracie, Royce Gracie, and Helio Soneca. I was an Alabama State Heavyweight Champion in sport jiu-jitsu in 1999. So I'm well aware of what MMA is so keep that in mind.

1. The pace is wrong - As BJ Penn pointed out in his Book of Knowledge. When he first started in MMA he had to learn to pace himself.. MMA was different than street fighting because in street fighting you go balls out you can't pace yourself. MMA teaches you to pace yourself because you don't want to gas out in later rounds just like any other sport. The longer a fight in the street goes on the more the chance exists of you being injured or the situation escalating even further.

2. Requires physical prowess to be effective - MMA fighters are always in great shape which isn't true of alot of officers or at least not on that level. A good defensive tactics program should be able to work for every officer not just certain officers. To use an MMA program as your DT program is short sighted and doesn't take into account the needs of all your officers. Plus at the same time you have officers of different sizes and shapes trying to apply the same tactics which doesn't work. What works for an officer 5'2 doesn't work for an officer 6'4. MMA has weight classes real life does not. Alot of the moves are designed to work only on people the same size as you and you need to be aware of it.

3. Takes too long to become proficient - MMA fighters train there asses off. Some of them work 4 to 6 hours everyday on honing those skills. Your officers do not have that luxury. Even with 4 to 6 hours training a day it takes them months to become proficient. When your officers attend a course they need something that works now not later. What happens if they get attacked now...not later? Plus MMA tends to focus on techniques not concepts. Concepts applied correctly work for everyone....techniques don't.

4. The situation is wrong - MMA fights know who they are going to fight and they know it's only going to be one unarmed person. Your officers will never know any of those things. If you teach an officer a course that tells them to go to the ground on purpose in a violent assault while they are wearing all that gear you might as well help their families pick out a casket ahead of time. It is ignorant and irresponsible to do that. Much less the fact that it could be multiple attackers. MMA fighters know they won't be ambushed in the ring either plus they can always tap if they put themselves in a bad situation....but you can't. Not only is it physically different it is mentally different. They are almost nothing alike.

    These are only 4 examples and I can go on all day on this stuff but I think you see my point. Alot of the things taught in MMA courses can work for some. The tactics themselves aren't the problem I teach some of those same tactics in my courses. The problem is the structure is not conducive to learning quickly and the stuff just isn't right for everyone. Many times the instructors in the courses don't even truly understand the needs of officers and everything that factors into it. In closing when you choose a DT program for your officers please think about these points I've highlighted and make a more educated decision.