“Force Protection” is a technical term referring to a specific set of actions used in protecting and defending members of the Department of Defense (DoD). While these techniques are incorporated into the protocols employed by FPA, it is important to first consider the general concept of force, how it is properly and improperly manifested in the context of security and protective services, and why the correct application of force is critical to mission success and to achieving the ultimate goal of protecting people and property.

Typically, the first idea invoked by the term force is one of extreme physical action or interference; a person moving, restraining, or attacking a target with abrupt & focused strength. The use of forceful maneuvers will always increase the risk of injury and often cause an escalation of emotional volatility and increasingly dangerous physical responses, so physical force is a last resort and should be diligently avoided whenever possible. Of course, this can be very difficult to achieve in the progression of many common live-action scenarios in the field, because survival instincts are deeply and powerfully ingrained in people, by virtue of natural evolution. We are simply biologically programmed to take aggressive actions when we sense danger to ourselves and others. Because of this, it is vital to require the extensive education and training of guards to help them understand these tendencies and to develop consistent habits and strongly conditioned responses that are sometimes contrary to natural instinct.

An obvious example is when a person is forcefully shoved, they immediately shove back, without thinking. It is an automatic reaction generated by instinct and the body’s natural need to protect itself. However, a properly trained guard will constantly evaluate a situation and be prepared for such a shove, and will consciously curtail their natural urge to reciprocate. Instead, they will take a firm and protective stance while evaluating the source of contact and the potential continued danger it imposes, while engaging the source verbally in measured yet forceful words and tone. Another example is a guard blocking an entrance or directing pedestrian traffic, and calculating the ideal distance to maintain between themselves and an approaching person to clearly indicate the blockage or forced directive while minimizing the perception of intimidation that might incite a person to become agitated or unnecessarily physical.

In these scenarios, confrontation is necessary and unavoidable, but there are habits and techniques used to avoid being perceived as confrontational and to diffuse tension and negative or violent reactions from those involved. By remaining calm and relying on extensively trained reflexes, a guard can limit potentially explosive interactions and prevent a significant amount of violence and physical danger from ever starting in the first place.