Winning Violent Encounters: What Use of Force Training Should Actually Cover
By Amir Khillah
Use-of-force and subject-control instructor · Michigan peace officer · Founder, Centurion Modern Subject Control
You cannot talk your way out of every violent encounter. Pretending otherwise does not make agencies safer—it leaves officers under-prepared for the fights they actually get into.
That was the through-line of my conversation with Dr. Travis Yates on Courageous Leadership, in the episode Winning Violent Encounters with Amir Khilla (aired Nov. 4, 2026; note the episode title’s spelling). For chiefs, sheriffs, and training managers, the useful takeaway is not a highlight reel of techniques. It is a training design problem: use of force training that ignores assault data, overweights flashy curriculum, and treats “de-escalation” as words alone will not produce officers who can apply subject control techniques under stress.
The competency effect: hands-on skill supports de-escalation
A common fear inside agencies is that officers who are skilled at hands-on control will “look for fights.” Street experience and training research point the other way.
When officers are competent going hands-on, they are usually calmer. They communicate better. They are less likely to escalate from ego. In the Yates interview I called that the competency effect: as confidence in hands-on skill rises, de-escalation skill tends to rise with it. Officers who know they can control a problem if they must are less likely to force a problem that could still be resolved at a lower level.
De-escalation is not a single verbal script. Sometimes early, controlled physical action—soft empty-hand control before a situation spirals—prevents a later need for higher force. Waiting for the perfect conversation while pre-attack indicators stack up is not restraint. It is delay. Good use of force training teaches officers to recognize that difference and to choose the lowest effective level of control that still protects everyone on scene.
Start with how officers are actually assaulted
Most defensive tactics programs still start with what the instructor likes to teach. That is human, and it is a poor use of limited training hours.
Agencies get very little mat time. State minimums are exactly that—minimums. If a department only budgets a handful of hours a year for defensive tactics, the curriculum has to be reverse-engineered from the street: pull-aways, haymakers, tackles, and other high-frequency problems. Flashy sport sequences that officers cannot recall under adrenaline do not survive contact. Officers either feel inadequate because they cannot reproduce a demo, or they try something complex and get hurt.
Centurion Modern Subject Control is built around that constraint: distill the most common assault patterns, then teach simple, repeatable subject control techniques and principles officers can still access when breathing is high and options are few. Better curriculum beats “more curriculum” when memory under stress is the limiting factor.
For a longer treatment of why sport habits alone are a weak foundation for duty work, see my Police1 article Is Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu the optimal defensive tactic for law enforcement?. The short version for training managers: BJJ is a cornerstone, not the whole building. Standing control, wrestling base, and top position matter when a firearm and a badge are on the belt.
Weapon retention is subject control, not a separate silo
One of the highest-consequence failures in a hands-on fight is losing the gun. Retention is not a range-day checkbox. It is empty-hand control under load.
In a recent Centurion teaching short—He has your gun. Now what?—the first priority is clear: distance and control before you are fighting for the grip. In a related Warrior Poet Society session we cut for officers (holster-retention drill with John Lovell), the sequence starts the same way: secure the gun and keep it in the holster, then step in, control the arm, and finish with a simple figure-four and circular step to the ground. Retention first. Then control. Then cuffing or disengagement.
That is the same logic as the Yates conversation: train the problems officers actually face, in the order those problems show up, with techniques they can still perform when the plan falls apart.
What leaders should measure
If training is not measurable, it will not improve. Departments that want honest feedback on their use of force training should track more than attendance sheets:
How often contacts resolve with minimal or no force
Outcomes when force is used (officer injuries, subject injuries)
Whether soft empty-hand options are available early—or whether delays push officers into tools and higher force
On the Yates conversation I noted that policy treating hands-on control as a last resort in every case can raise use of force and officer assaults, not lower them. Training managers should compare outcomes to the curriculum they actually delivered—not to the press release.
Budgets and backfill are real constraints. So is liability. Settling after a preventable injury is not cheaper leadership than building competent officers. State minimums do not relieve a chief of the duty to prepare people for the job.
A field guide for the hours you do not get
Many agencies will not get past a few hours of annual defensive tactics. Street officers still need something they can study after briefing and drill with a zone partner.
That is why I wrote The Officer’s Top-10: A Field Guide to the Fights Cops Actually Get Into—scenarios and principles built around common fights, not a catalog of demos. It is a stopgap for agencies that cannot yet fund the mat time the job deserves, and a supplement for those that can. Use code PRESS10 at checkout for 10% off.
For chiefs and training managers
If you own defensive tactics or use of force training for your agency:
Audit curriculum against assault patterns, not instructor preference.
Treat hands-on competence as a de-escalation tool, not a liability.
Keep subject control techniques simple enough to recall under stress—and drill them with progressive resistance.
Integrate weapon retention into empty-hand training instead of siloing “gun day” from “mat day.”
Measure injuries and force outcomes the same way you measure firearms quals.
Agency programs and instructor courses through Centurion Modern Subject Control are built for that mission. Details for departments: centurionmsc.com/law-enforcement.
To schedule agency or instructor training, email booking@centurionmsc.com.
About the author
Amir Khillah is a Michigan peace officer and use-of-force / subject-control instructor. He previously taught subject control at a regional police academy, holds a 2nd-degree Brazilian jiu-jitsu black belt, is a retired professional MMA athlete, and founded Centurion Modern Subject Control. He writes on defensive tactics for Police1 and Law Officer and is the author of The Officer’s Top-10 Field Guide.
Comments