Handcuffing Tactics Manual
Of all the separate components of officers' subject control, handcuffing is. There are several aspects in the development of a tactical handcuffing system that. The use of handcuffs as a restraint tool is common practice by law enforcement and security officers. The process of handcuffing is intrinsically a dangerous process due to the officer being placed in very close proximity to the person being arrested. PPCI Training is the leader in specialized training programs on Handcuffing. Protection Baton Tactics” programs will recognize that. Manual, and related.
Handcuffing Tactics
Trent Benefield in handcuffs after the police shot him and his friends Sean Bell and Joseph Guzman in Queens last year. Credit Citywide News Network It was done after three men were shot in Queens a year ago in a hail of 50 police bullets. It occurred again on Monday, after five officers fired 20 shots at Khiel Coppin outside his Brooklyn home, killing him. A man is down, on the ground, bleeding, and the police are handcuffing him.
Relatives, friends, neighbors and curious onlookers often see one thing: a wounded man, who is already incapacitated, being further restrained. While the deadly force itself is always Topic A, the handcuffing that follows can become a flash point for angry outbursts, seen as one final indignity. It may sound backward: The cuffs go on after the shooting.
Others may see it as a kind of street justice, an extension of the authority that comes with a badge, though most officers would argue with such reasoning. “It is standard procedure,” said Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman. “It is standard procedure to handcuff somebody, even after he’s shot.” Indeed, the use of handcuffs is mandated by the Patrol Guide, the department’s policy manual. “Handcuff prisoners with hands behind back,” the guide instructs in a section outlining the procedures for an arresting officer. In another section, titled “Prisoners Requiring Medical/Psychiatric Treatment,” the guide states that an arresting officer should “rear cuff and place leg restraints on prisoner before transporting to hospital.” Critics of the policy concede that handcuffing is acceptable to keep a shot person from doing further violence to himself or others, particularly if he may still be armed or in psychiatric distress.
But several people said that police officials ought to re-examine the one-size-fits-all nature of the policy, particularly if the shot person is clearly incapacitated or dead from the bullets. Kuby, a civil rights lawyer who has represented clients shot and handcuffed by the police, said the practice could leave an impression of harsh treatment, even when a shooting was justified. “Cuffing people after they’ve been shot, or when they’re dead, or when they’re dying,” Mr.
Kuby said, “is one of the ugliest, most barbaric, unnecessarily horrifying things that the police do, and they do it as a matter of course.” He said the shooting of Mr. Coppin, who the officers believed had a gun, appeared to be legally justified. Advertisement But he questioned whether handcuffing the young man was appropriate, considering that Mr. Coppin was so gravely wounded.
“I think what you lose in public support and approval is far greater than any marginal, negligible fraction of safety that they may gain,” Mr. “All of that support is thrown away when they handcuff a helpless, bleeding, dying person, because when it looks brutal and unnecessary, it casts a pall on the entire incident.” Active and retired officers generally say that assessing someone’s propensity for lethal behavior is impossible to do in a short time, particularly after a shooting, when emotions are pumping. A dark street or bad weather can make things worse. One law enforcement official recalled several instances in which officers had found a second gun hidden on a suspect after he had been shot and handcuffed. Nerney, who retired in 2002 as a detective in the Police Department’s Major Case Squad, said officers relied on rules to survive in shooting situations. Nerney, who was in four gunfights in his career, said that the rigor of the handcuffing rule “removes the discretion from a police officer saying, ‘Should I or shouldn’t I?’ because either way you can be damned.” “If it is just a standard procedure,” he said, “the objective is not only to protect the lives of the officers but to prevent someone who might be psychologically damaged or emotionally disturbed from further injuring themselves, particularly with a gunshot wound that might be superficial and then made fatal by someone who is exercising ‘suicide by cop.’”. Advertisement They described how, on Gates Avenue in Bedford-Stuyvesant about 7:20 p.m., the officers handcuffed Mr.
Coppin, who had been hit by 10 bullets. “Then they put him on a stretcher and just took him out of here,” said Beverly Holloman, 50, who watched from her fourth-floor window. In an interview on NY1 News on Friday, Mr. Coppin’s stepfather, Reginald Owens, said that when witnesses told him about the handcuffs, it only deepened his rage: “I come on the scene and one of the officers told me, a commander or somebody, told me: ‘I feel for you.
I don’t know all of what happened, but it appears that your son is dead.’ “‘O.K. Where’s he at?’ “‘They took him in the hospital.’ “Then,” Mr. Owens continued, “you hear people on the street telling you that he was shot and they still handcuffed him to the back, still had his hands behind his back and handcuffed him and threw him in the back of the car.” A similar scene played out last November, after the police fatally shot Sean Bell and wounded two of his friends as they sat in Mr. Bell’s car outside a strip club in Jamaica, Queens, after Mr. Bell’s bachelor party. Officers say they fired because Mr. Bell was driving his car into them; at least one detective involved in the shooting said he thought one of Mr.
Bell’s companions was about to fire a gun, according to someone familiar with that detective’s account. Two detectives have been charged with manslaughter and one with reckless endangerment. When the shots ended, a sergeant called for an ambulance and then directed a colleague to put cuffs on the outstretched hands of Joseph Guzman, one of Mr. Bell’s passengers. The other wounded friend, Trent Benefield, who was in a rear seat, scrambled out of the car and collapsed half a block away, where he was handcuffed. The sergeant at the scene also ordered Mr.
Bell handcuffed, according to the preliminary police report of the shooting. Advertisement Michael Hardy, a lawyer for Mr. Benefield and Mr. Guzman, said he believed that Mr. Bell ultimately was not handcuffed. “I think they realized he was dead,” Mr. Hardy and Sanford A.
Rubenstein, another lawyer representing the wounded men, said they believed the Police Department should consider altering its policy. Officers should be trained to exercise “discretion” in the way they restrain people, said Donna Lieberman, the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.
She said the use of handcuffs, even under the best of circumstances, could put physical stress on people. “In certain circumstances, particularly where someone is injured and it stands to exacerbate the injury, it may well be tantamount to cruel and unusual punishment,” Ms.
Lieberman said of the policy. “I think the Police Department has to rethink it.” But in police encounters, there is often a wide gulf between perception and reality, said a Police Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for the agency. As jarring as it is to see a shot person being handcuffed or frisked, the official said, the measures are necessary. And the public attention to such scenes comes only after the police have acted, he said, drawing an analogy to a sports referee who sees only the second half of some action on the field; what the suspect did to prompt the police response is often missed. “Just because it might not look pretty,” the police official said, “doesn’t mean what the police are doing is not a good thing.”.
Tactical Handcuffing Physical Intervention and the use of Restraint Techniques are a health and safety risk, and the risk of injury to both service-users and staff alike can be very high. What can be done to minimise or eliminate the risk when the level is unacceptably high? Physical Intervention is a manual handling activity and is therefore, as such, covered by the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992. These regulations actually state that, where-ever possible, the manual handling of any load should be automated or mechanised. In the case of restraint therefore, the use of hand-cuffs or another suitable restraint equipment should therefore be considered as part of the risk assessment process. Contrary to popular belief, the safe and correct use if restraint equipment is lawful in accordance with the law regarding reasonable force, human rights and health and safety legislation. Therefore, in certain high-risk situations it may be necessary, as well as lawful, for front-line staff to use restraint equipment.
The benefits are as follows: – Simple and effective to use. – Reduces the risk of having to use restraint for a long period of time.
– Cost-effective and time-saving. – Prevents the restriction of breathing on the part of the service-user. – Assists in making the moving and handling of people easier. Softcuffs However, it is also the responsibility of the employer (in accordance with the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974) to provide the necessary information, instruction, training and supervision to staff as required.
This is where N Davies Training can assist. Tactical Handcuff training (as well as the new Softcuff variant) will provide your staff with the following knowledge and skills:. An understanding of the main reasons as to why restraint equipment (handcuffs and softcuffs) is used. An understanding of the health & safety provisions with regard to the use of restraint equipment including: sections 2,3 and 7 of the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974, Reg 3(1) of the Management of Health & Safety at work Regulations 1999, Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, as well as the significance of new offences created under the Health and Safety Offences Act 2008 and the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007.
Handcuffing Tactics Manually
An understanding of the law in relation to the use of reasonable force and how this relates to the use of restraint equipment, including Section 3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967, Common Law, Section 117 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and Articles 2, 3 and 5 of Human Rights Act 1998. An understanding of the relevance of other area of guidance, as appropriate. For example: the Mental Health Act 1983 Code of Practice and NICE guidance. An understanding of any medical implications to using restraint equipment, including reducing the risk of positional asphyxia. Instruction in how to apply handcuffs and softcuffs to a passive subject, an aggressive subject and how to remove equipment safely and correctly. Contact us for more information and a free consultation: 15 Interested in Advanced Instructor Training? Click on the banner below to find out more: (Advertisement Feature).