Within any police training program, even with the best of intentions, we can unintentionally create “training scars” — negative impacts that officers must work through. One of the most concerning trends facing trainers today is the tendency to disengage from a hands-on encounter at the first sign that a suspect may resist or fight back.
It is critical to teach officers how to recognize levels of potential resistance and identify pre-attack indicators or behaviors while balancing response options. Training disengagement and the thought process behind it can be a valuable tactical tool. However, it is equally important to ensure officers are trained on when not to disengage — when to commit fully to winning the fight in the current moment.
I wanted to share some thoughts on how and when to train disengagement, as well as provide ideas on how to balance it with training that emphasizes commitment to action when necessary.
When to disengage
1. When you are outnumbered. You are involved in a situation either hands on, or prior to, and you are outnumbered by suspects or potential sympathizers (friends, bar crowd, etc.).
2. When you are losing the fight. You are not winning! The suspect has displayed better skills, speed, or a commitment to resisting that is beyond your hand-to-hand skill level.
3. When you are losing emotional control. You are responding to resistance out of frustration or anger and no longer evaluating the circumstances as trained.
4. When the threat changes. You engage in physical control and the suspect or bystander does something to change the level of resistance (pulls a knife or gun, baseball bat, or grabs a hostage).
When not to disengage
1. When there is the slightest form of resistance. We know most resistance will occur upon first touch so be prepared to counter that. For example, if you are going to escort someone, you should know when you first touch them it is highly likely they will try to pull away or curl their arm in as a response. Your training should prepare how to go to a control hold in anticipation of this reaction, it is not time to completely disengage and escalate your use of force as an ONLY option.
2. When you have control of a position. If you have the suspect on the ground and are working to get them cuffed, just because they refuse to bring their hands out, does not automatically mean you should disengage completely. Instead, you should look for openings to pry the arm out and have techniques that allow you to do so safely, while still offering you the mobility to disengage if #4 above happens.
How to train a balanced approach
Training should focus on developing students’ critical thinking skills by presenting real-life problems in the safety of the training environment. For example, prone cuffing drills should be practiced from a variety of positions, not just the standard scenario where the suspect is lying on their stomach with their hands and arms out to the side.
Fostering a “what’s next” mentality is essential to build students’ confidence, ensuring that if technique A does not work, they can smoothly transition to technique B.
Students should practice both approaches. In scenario-based training, it’s important to train, evaluate and reinforce both working through problems and continuing to win a hands-on encounter, as well as disengagement (based on the parameters outlined). If these scenarios aren’t practiced in training, how can we expect students to perform when it matters most?
Training should also incorporate resistance. Not all repetitions should involve a fully compliant training partner. Students need practice with instructors and coaches who can provide controlled resistance, appropriate to the student’s skill level. This allows students to begin integrating theory, skills and thought processes on their own.
