How to handle or How not to handle the mentally impaired...

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are quite a few signs of alcoholism here, but I cant say 100 % this person is an alcoholic. As for special treatment of course you give them special treatment. I would not approach this person in the same way I approach others.
 
A drunk is a drunk is a drunk is a drunk.
For my line of bar security work, we have no seperate protocols for dealing with a nonalcoholic drunk vs an alcoholic drunk.

From a practical/tactical standpoint, how would you distinguish between the two when you are faced with a violent incident involving a drunk? How would you know the person is suffering the illness of alcoholism? Or would you just treat all drunks as if they are alcoholics?
 
Quoting the OP -
The intoxicated man will win every time as the adrenaline surges through them. Pepper spray and tasers will not keep the man on the ground. However, non-aggressive and passive tactics will keep the peace.
Click to expand...


Do you really believe this? If you do, I have some news that may disturb you. Intoxicated people do not win all the time. TASERS and pepper spray are deployed in use of force situations against intoxicated persons on a regular basis in a successful manner.
 
Obit; true story....

Many years ago, I read a obit of a older gent who was well respected in the community.
In the description of the man & his background was an account of how he was in a confrontation with a armed bank robber who fled a crime scene in the 1940s. The man talked the robber into surrendering to police! :eek:
He was known to have a clear, deep voice & was well known for his speeches/oratory skills.

Some people can resolve or handle critical incidents better than others. It takes training, skill, experience, and yes, even a bit of luck sometimes.
 
People can be talked down. I don't deny that. But the statement made that "the intoxicated man will win every time", is something I just can not agree with.

Some people can be talked into handcuffs while intoxicated, some people, not so much.
 
I watched the video, this my opinion.

The cop did what cops are expected to do, they wrestle with bad guys. That never turns out well. Every time I attempted to handcuff anyone I was arresting, drunk or not and they resisted, I escalated force. I am not dancing, I am not playing by the same rules they are, if that means that I pound on their kidneys for a while than so be it. I am going home at the end of my shift.
 
The man on the ground is obviously not armed and who are they a threat to laying on the ground? Is standing over the man straddling him the best tactic? Obviously this man on the ground got the better of the other man and the sad end result was death so these tactics were not acceptable.

The tactics of the man laying on the ground should be studied IMHO. That was a good reversal using the other mans weight to flip him over.

The end result here in any event was death and thats not acceptable. A different approach should have been used to engage the man on the ground. Engaging any man alone is very risky.
 
i remember a real similar thread like this last year. it went ugly fast. threads like this need to be killed fast.

reality,

life is life. no matter what. it sucks. end of story.

conversely, if someone cant pass a drug/alcohol test or a mental competency test, or dont ignore the pink elephant sipping tea in the corner, then im not supposed to use deadly force?
 
It wont get ugly if you stick with the topic and follow the forum style/rules. In this scenario there is a man on the ground intoxicated. How do you handle the situation if you must? Also the man on the ground executes a nice reversal move like I pointed out before. I think handling the man alone is a mistake. Standing over or near him also a mistake especially when alone.

Its a worthy video to study and contemplate.
 
There is nothing like starting over everyday. no one remembers Rodney King, Rodney was laying on the ground. On a bad day I want to be laying on the ground, the dumbest think anyone can do when I am laying on the ground is stand over me, I decided many years ago I was not going to be a victim, I have had many interesting days, anyhow, Rodney had a plan, he was going to roll up on someone's legs, there is a good chance someone could have gotten their spine crushed.

As I remember there was a video of Rodney laying on the ground, I was in Los Anglers the day the first trial ended.

Two standards: On that day Reginald Denny became a victim.

F. Guffey
 
Post #29, serious threat.....

I disagree with post 29.
Who exactly are you going to have run to your aid in a critical incident?
Is a SWAT or SRT unit going to fast-rope down the second you call them?

Calling for back-up or contacting 911 is smart & sometimes necessary but you can't be risk-adverse either.
As for allowing a subject to flee or not to take any actions isn't a viable option either. A violent or aggressive subject who assaults/attacks a uniformed security guard-sworn LE officer is a greater or more serious threat to the general public.
 
The individual in the video looks like he was laying down and possibly injured. He did not appear to be running from the other man or "fleeing". He wasnt actively assaulting the officer. I think he might not have known he was an officer in his drunken state. All he knew was there was a man standing over him and touching him aggressively.
 
The man on the ground is obviously not armed and who are they a threat to laying on the ground? Is standing over the man straddling him the best tactic?
Click to expand...
Subdue and detain. Best tactic or not, what the off duty officer was doing in his role as hotel security, after witnessing the subject assault the cab driver, was the right thing to do. His decision to go hands on and detain was the right move to make.
Standing over or near him also a mistake especially when alone.
Click to expand...
johnelmore, do you have any experience doing security work? I'm wondering if your opinions are based on life experience or just assumptions.
 
The man on the ground is obviously not armed and who are they a threat to laying on the ground?
Click to expand...

Really? You could see into his pockets and under his shirt or notice the ankle holster he was carrying?

None of us could see that so how could you?
 
The minute he resisted he should be put down hard, the time for wrestling is over. I have seen it time and time again where an officer fails to use enough force soon enough and the fight gets out of control. As an officer you have an obligation to control the situation. He was more worried about the video-photographer than the guy he was fighting.
 
Video?....

I don't think the poster watched the section of video where the fire-fighter flees & runs down the alley first.
He clearly knew the armed security guard/off duty police officer was there & that he was in the wrong.

Intoxicated or not, the subject was wrong. The clip also clearly shows him kicking, punching & striking the security guard/cop.

There's another recent incident of a OK City police Sgt who had a spat with a citizen, flew into a rage, arrested him & now he's facing assault & battery charges. :eek:
The citizen did not resist & yelled; "false arrest". He's going to get a big check from the OK City government.
 
We don't see what happens before the video starts, so I can't comment on why the officer engaged him on the ground. But in any case if you aren't a police officer this is exactly the type of guy to walk away from. On the ground or not, look at his shoulders. He's a big boy.
 
OP, you asked about other tactics.

There is a one 1 on 1 tactic taught where you gain control of th subject's wrist and lock it and pull it forward extending his arm from his shoulder, using body mechanics and momentum to bring the subject into the ground. At this point the wrist lock turns into an arm bar or chicken wing and the subject's neck is stepped on by the closest knee. This tactic starts at the front of subject and ends at the side of the subject.

There is another taught tactic where you snap a handcuff on one of the subject's wrist as soon as possible and use the handcuffs as a lever on the wrist to guide the subject into a different position.

Regardless what other tactics could have been used, ask yourself, whose actions were more dangerous to the other? Were the officer's actions more dangerous to the subject or were the subject's actions more dangerous to the officer? When asking yourself that, take into account only their actions and nothing else, not who you think is at fault or whether or not it could have been prevented.

The reason we have a lot of opinions in conversations like these is because we generally don't have all the facts.
 
I feel like we are getting off topic. Let me try to regain the topic at hand.

Was the officers actions perfect in handling the man on the ground? Do you think the officer would have handled it differently if he had to do it again or was it a perfect execution?

Like I said, its a good video of what not to do. For example, right around the 40 second mark the officer flips around. This was his first mistake. He put himself in a position where the man on the ground can leverage. Then he loses focus and yells at the bystanders giving the man crucial seconds to pull a reversal move.

So my key takeaways are positioning and focus. Not putting yourself in a vulnerable position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top