Ethical or discriminatory: A Jiujitsu gym that wont train police officers
1 day(s) ago • 222 views • 25 replies
Do gym owners have a moral obligation to train everyone? I posted something similar to this a while back. I was in Washington DC several years ago and dropped in on a gym that had a rule that they would not allow Law enforcement to train there. After class I straight up asked him “What is the story behind that? “ I wanted to know what the deal was. Almost all Jiu-Jitsu gyms (in the US) welcome Military and LEO. It came down to some political beliefs as well as standing by idea that as a private business owner he can determine who he wants to train and why. And in light of recent events…i want to through the question out again… Should a Jiujitsu gym be allowed to refuse training to law enforcement due to a moral obligation? Where is the line? |
In the US a business owner traditionally has had the right to refuse service to anyone. However, in our current culture of protected classes that has somewhat gone away because almost everyone seems to be in some kind of protected class. Does a gym have a moral responsibility to train everyone? Absolutely not. But they have to accept that a refusal to train an individual without an objective reason could land them in court and put them out of business. There are a lot of people in the US that are delusional about the law enforcement community because that is the line we have been fed for roughly the last decade. |
This situation reminds me a lot of the 'wedding cake' cases, where bakeries refused to make custom cakes for same-sex weddings based on moral/religious objections. I wonder how many people on each side will flip-flop on this principle depending on whose 'team' is being refused. If you believe a baker should have the right to refuse service because they shouldn't be forced to support an event that violates their conscience, then to be consistent, you have to support this gym owner's right to refuse LEOs for their own moral reasons. On the other hand, if you believe that a business open to the public must serve everyone regardless of the owner's personal beliefs, then you should technically be against the gym owner excluding cops. The legal and moral question is usually the same: Does a private business have absolute autonomy, or are they a public accommodation? Shouldn't we apply the same standard to the gym owner that we apply to the baker, regardless of our personal politics? |
"Do gym owners have a moral obligation to train everyone? I posted something similar to this a while back. I was in Washington DC several years ago and dropped in on a gym that had a rule that they would not allow Law enforcement to train there. After class I straight up asked him “What is the story behind that? “ I wanted to know what the deal was. Almost all Jiu-Jitsu gyms (in the US) welcome Military and LEO. It came down to some political beliefs as well as standing by idea that as a private business owner he can determine who he wants to train and why. And in light of recent events…i want to through the question out again… Should a Jiujitsu gym be allowed to refuse training to law enforcement due to a moral obligation? Where is the line?" Imagine excluding someone that might be a valuable member of the team based on assumptions you've made about them based on their job? Obviously a coach can pick who can & can't train for any reason he likes, but it seems like in this situation he's probably going to be cutting off his nose to spite his face. |
If you'd asked me last year, I would had found it totally ridiculous to ban law enforcement, but I would say all bets are off in the US now. At the same time, the last shooting could had been prevented if the 6-7 officers involved had been comfortable with controlling one person through grappling instead of shooting. Although it didn't look like the objective was to actually control, so perhaps increased non-lethal options wouldn't change anything anyways. Just looking at it objectively and not going into politics. |
"If you'd asked me last year, I would had found it totally ridiculous to ban law enforcement, but I would say all bets are off in the US now. At the same time, the last shooting could had been prevented if the 6-7 officers involved had been comfortable with controlling one person through grappling instead of shooting. Although it didn't look like the objective was to actually control, so perhaps increased non-lethal options wouldn't change anything anyways. Just looking at it objectively and not going into politics." What do you expect if the complete training for those guys is only 8 weeks to five months…. Ridiculous. In Germany, depending on state or if you want to join federal police, it’s minimum 2,5 years to 3 years of study time and training. There are some evaluations,that police officers, who train BJJ in addition to the mandatory DT/control tactics training (which is not enough anyway), can handle „physical management“ better, are more confident in their abilities/ use of force without relying on tools and weapons, get less injured while using force and don’t injure the suspect/ less injured suspects after using force…. |
To each their own. I prefer police officers, To have more options, Than just their firearms, And other quite lethal methods. Also, I find, the value of sport, Is to allow people that might otherwise not speak, or interact, To have ways to do so, that are constructive, Rather than destructive. But, that is just my free thoughts. |
"This situation reminds me a lot of the 'wedding cake' cases, where bakeries refused to make custom cakes for same-sex weddings based on moral/religious objections. I wonder how many people on each side will flip-flop on this principle depending on whose 'team' is being refused. If you believe a baker should have the right to refuse service because they shouldn't be forced to support an event that violates their conscience, then to be consistent, you have to support this gym owner's right to refuse LEOs for their own moral reasons. On the other hand, if you believe that a business open to the public must serve everyone regardless of the owner's personal beliefs, then you should technically be against the gym owner excluding cops. The legal and moral question is usually the same: Does a private business have absolute autonomy, or are they a public accommodation? Shouldn't we apply the same standard to the gym owner that we apply to the baker, regardless of our personal politics?" Respectfully, the baker case was a bit more nuanced, than that. The baker, in those cases, was not refusing to sell them cakes, Rather refusing to put specific speech on the cakes, that they felt violated their own moral conscience. In that case, it was not a refusal to take that counter party as customers, But a refusal to make specific art or speech as customizations to the products they otherwise sell, and would otherwise be willing to sell. This kind of case, raises all kinds of questions, regarding individual liberty, and free speech, in several directions. And, as is often the case, the devil is in the details. |
"If you'd asked me last year, I would had found it totally ridiculous to ban law enforcement, but I would say all bets are off in the US now. At the same time, the last shooting could had been prevented if the 6-7 officers involved had been comfortable with controlling one person through grappling instead of shooting. Although it didn't look like the objective was to actually control, so perhaps increased non-lethal options wouldn't change anything anyways. Just looking at it objectively and not going into politics." I hear what you’re saying, and I get that from the outside looking in, the U.S. can seem chaotic right now. But one thing that’s important to keep in mind is that the public only ever sees a tiny, edited slice of these incidents, usually the most dramatic few seconds. Those clips don’t show the lead up, the context, or what the officers were actually dealing with in real time. It’s really easy to Monday‑morning‑quarterback these situations from a distance, but my training in the military taught me never to judge anyone’s actions when they’re under pressure or under fire. Unless you were there, you don’t truly know what they were facing. Because of that, it’s hard to fairly judge the actions of the people involved, especially from another country where policing, training, and threat levels are completely different. I’m not saying officers are always right, but I also don’t think it’s fair to assume they were at fault based on videos that were cut and circulated specifically to shape public opinion. That’s why this whole question about gyms banning law enforcement is complicated. If we’re going to talk about moral obligations, then part of that is being honest about how limited the public information usually is. Most of what people see are short, edited clips released by media outlets or shared online, and both sides tend to massage those fragments to fit whatever narrative they already believe. When that’s the only lens someone has, especially from outside the U.S., it becomes really easy to draw conclusions that don’t match the full reality. And if anything, more training, not less, is what leads to better outcomes for everyone involved. |
If one has arms in one's academy of any kind, I do strongly recommend a good gun safe, and strict risk management. Some academies allow arms in them, and some don't. I could see that, as a nightmare scenario, meaning any failures in continuity of control. And, the worst folks are the ones who are cocky about it. |
Learning alternative means of control aside, allowing law enforcement the opportunity to engage with people who they may not have otherwise helps to foster community. Fear is generally why police become violent and fear of groups come from a lack of understanding or knowledge of those demographics. Since Jiujitsu is practiced by such a wide range of communities, police who practice can have opportunities to immerse themselves in other cultures, groups, or demographics. This ability to now relate to others can encourage law enforcement to pause and try to initiate other forms of control then deadly force. Owners of gyms should absolutely be allowed to prevent who ever they want to come to their gyms but I feel like this would have the opposite effect they are looking for in the community. |
"Do gym owners have a moral obligation to train everyone? Should a Jiujitsu gym be allowed to refuse training to law enforcement due to a moral obligation? Where is the line?" Personally, I don't think anyone should HAVE to train anybody they don't want. I'm not a lawyer though, especially not an international one, so you might want to look into your local and national laws before excluding anyone. I guess this gym probably has a ton of "ACAB" guys who serve as the student base for their school, so they probably feel that training with LEO's would disrupt the vibe and maybe cause some unwanted tension/drama. I'm otherwise not sure why you wouldn't want your local/federal LEO's to be well trained in BJJ, as I think it would be better for the officer as well as the suspect, regardless of whether or not you disagree with the actions of LEO's, the laws they are hired to enforce or the manner in which they're enforced. I definitely have my own personal opinions on these things, but ultimately, I think there would be less death and destruction if LEO's were more skilled in BJJ. Plus, who doesn't love getting paid to beat up cops? However, these are my opinions, and I think someone with a differing opinion should be able to exclude LEO's if they like. |
The other thing is, everyone has their own areas of expertise. From a self-defense perspective, there are certainly competing methods, and lots of ground to cover. By collaborating, we bring greater rigor and relevance, to our practice and our teaching. Here is a recent panel discussion I was on, I am a civilian grapple fu person, The other was a long time LEO, The other, a combat vet. We all bring different points of view, and in that way, complement each other. https://www.youtube.com/w[...]4fjz6rV8D0 |
"I hear what you’re saying, and I get that from the outside looking in, the U.S. can seem chaotic right now. But one thing that’s important to keep in mind is that the public only ever sees a tiny, edited slice of these incidents, usually the most dramatic few seconds. Those clips don’t show the lead up, the context, or what the officers were actually dealing with in real time. It’s really easy to Monday‑morning‑quarterback these situations from a distance, but my training in the military taught me never to judge anyone’s actions when they’re under pressure or under fire. Unless you were there, you don’t truly know what they were facing. Because of that, it’s hard to fairly judge the actions of the people involved, especially from another country where policing, training, and threat levels are completely different. I’m not saying officers are always right, but I also don’t think it’s fair to assume they were at fault based on videos that were cut and circulated specifically to shape public opinion. That’s why this whole question about gyms banning law enforcement is complicated. If we’re going to talk about moral obligations, then part of that is being honest about how limited the public information usually is. Most of what people see are short, edited clips released by media outlets or shared online, and both sides tend to massage those fragments to fit whatever narrative they already believe. When that’s the only lens someone has, especially from outside the U.S., it becomes really easy to draw conclusions that don’t match the full reality. And if anything, more training, not less, is what leads to better outcomes for everyone involved." I've been in much worse situations as a security officer than together with six colleagues observing someone help a pushed over lady back up on her feet. But the Swedish way of handling these situations is a bit different. Fun to see this old video clip with Swedish cops on vacation breaking up a fight on the subway in New York. Just two guys on the one needing to be controlled and no need to punish him with pepper spray, bang hard metal objects repeatedly on his head or shoot him with a single bullet, even if he had a gun on him. Just calm control over the situation and not letting personal feelings take over. Simply law enforcement officers we would all be proud to have at our academy and trust to use BJJ for the right purposes. https://youtu.be/izdfnHBM[...]9k87xQLv2W |
"I've been in much worse situations as a security officer than together with six colleagues observing someone help a pushed over lady back up on her feet. But the Swedish way of handling these situations is a bit different. Fun to see this old video clip with Swedish cops on vacation breaking up a fight on the subway in New York. Just two guys on the one needing to be controlled and no need to punish him with pepper spray, bang hard metal objects repeatedly on his head or shoot him with a single bullet, even if he had a gun on him. Just calm control over the situation and not letting personal feelings take over. Simply law enforcement officers we would all be proud to have at our academy and trust to use BJJ for the right purposes. https://youtu.be/izdfnHBM[...]9k87xQLv2W" How do we know, if those tricky Swedes didn't have a little bit of that stinky fish, in their pockets? That would be against the Geneva Convention, you know.... |
Having trained police in martial arts and self defense, I can report that those who have proper training are much less likely to do serious harm than those who don't. Some people have the mistaken belief that having police in a school is intimidating to LGBT students, but my experience has not shown any difference between police reaction and the general student population at large. Some are prejudiced, and some aren't, but anyone serious about training needs to have a "we're all working in this together" attitude. It's fine in my book to eject someone from class who openly displays prejudice for any reason, be it racial, misanthropic, gender based or religious. But until demonstrably guilty, it is unreasonable to deny service based on generic perception. In doing so, one is demonstrating the same kind of bigotry and prejudice that they claim they are trying to prevent. |
"Having trained police in martial arts and self defense, I can report that those who have proper training are much less likely to do serious harm than those who don't. Some people have the mistaken belief that having police in a school is intimidating to LGBT students, but my experience has not shown any difference between police reaction and the general student population at large. Some are prejudiced, and some aren't, but anyone serious about training needs to have a "we're all working in this together" attitude. It's fine in my book to eject someone from class who openly displays prejudice for any reason, be it racial, misanthropic, gender based or religious. But until demonstrably guilty, it is unreasonable to deny service based on generic perception. In doing so, one is demonstrating the same kind of bigotry and prejudice that they claim they are trying to prevent." Police are gay or straight, same as General Pop, as the base case, unless someone could present some very strange evidences to the contrary. Then we will have a pickle, won't we. They are just people, too, last time I checked. |
While I tend to believe adults should be able to medicate themselves as they like, Police do have to enforce the laws, they must, they don't write them. So, if schools are running drugs, or, Do other such, -And this has been the case, many times, with schools, and even networks- That can get awkward, unless the cop-students, Also have wet beaks, and dirty hands. |
Mestre Renzo's father, got a ride, on the midnight police train, and then got out, or so the story goes, presumably because of the family connection. But, all these players, are just humans, The police, Then those very special kinds of characters, Who might be black belts and ref'ed the very first UFC, And held other duties. Shit gets weird, and real, quick, Sometimes. Strange old world. Go in Peace, if you can. |
