Training Research

Matt Bloodgood

Over the last year I have slowly worked my way into using AI. I don't fully trust it, but I've found it valuable in assisting with research work, identifying points/counterpoints in arguments related to training issues.

Over the last six months or so, I've been working on a force options management tool. Digging into some open source data over the last three years related to multiple officers being wounded or killed by singular suspects at a scene got me looking at firearms training. We spend considerable time on the range shooting multiple targets because one day an officer may be attacked by more than one subject. I don't disagree.

However...

The data over the last few years is showing that is a very rare occurrence, averaging less than one incident per year since 2024. What is occurring with some regularity- pushing over 22% of the time- is one subject wounding or killing multiple officers in the same event. In 2025 there were at least 29 incidents, injuring 62 officers and killing 14 more. The suspect died in 19 of those 29 incidents. So far this year, 11 incidents involving 25 officers (4 killed).

Putting Perplexity Max and the new Perplexity Computer to work, I tasked it with reviewing FBI LEOKA data and my OSINT data. The intent is to build a training module related to the issues across several training domains.

When it came to disucssing one of many points, this popped up: "The pivot point in the lesson is showing them that the skill they have (engaging stationary multiple targets) is real but rarely deployed, and the skill they need (decision making under fire, at contact distance, with partners) is mostly untrained.”

Reading that again- the skill they have is real but rarely deployed, and the skill they need is mostly untrained. Live fire, as actually conducted on most ranges, rehearses the wrong skill. Stationary shooter + non-threatening stationary target + known distance + no decision ≠ the problem officers die in.

This is an argument that there is a training mismatch. It's not to argue that less firearms training is the answer, but more diversified training is. If an instructor is insistent that all firearms training be conducted live fire- it's not supported by the data. We need to break these old training paradigms.

Chris Butler Steve "Pappy" Papenfuhs Jeff Johnsgaard Michael Musengo