Police1’s “What Cops Want in 2025” survey of 1,260 police officers reveals a troubling reality about law enforcement training in America: there’s a massive and nationwide disconnect between the training officers want and need to stay safe, and what they’re receiving.
In this article, we examine three critical areas of training highlighted in the survey, focusing on results related to firearms, defensive tactics and scenario-based training. The same patterns emerge across all three aspects: officers want more frequent, realistic, integrated training, but their agencies are falling short of providing it.
The implications of these results extend far beyond training statistics or opinion. When officers feel inadequately prepared for life-or-death situations, public safety suffers, officer safety deteriorates and community trust erodes. The officers who responded to the survey have spoken clearly about what they need. The question is whether agencies and policymakers will heed the call.
Firearms training: Moving beyond basic marksmanship
When it comes to firearms training, the survey reveals a stark gap between current practice and officer expectations. While half of officers (49.6%) believe their department-provided firearms training adequately prepares them for high-stress scenarios, nearly 28% disagree, leaving a substantial portion feeling underprepared for critical incidents.
The data identifies five critical areas where officers believe their firearms training needs significant improvement:
- Moving target practice (71.5%)
- More frequent training (69.2%)
- Decision-making under pressure (69.0%)
- Stress inoculation (62.0%)
- Shooting accuracy (46.0%)
Current training frequency reveals troubling gaps. For on-duty training beyond basic qualification:
- 12% train weekly or monthly
- 27% train quarterly
- 21% train annually
- 39% rarely or never receive additional training
Officers consistently emphasize the need for more than just annual qualifications. As one respondent noted, “Any training would be good. We only qual once a year.”
What can we do now to bridge this gap?
The data shows that officers are eager for better training. With nearly 40% of officers rarely or never receiving on-duty training beyond basic qualification, there’s clearly room for improvement. The question isn’t whether better training is needed, but whether agencies will make the investment necessary to provide it. The firearms training officers want to avoid is the infrequent, isolated, and static flat-range shooting that masquerades as training. Agencies need to step up their game and accept that passing the qualification means nothing. That change may be a long time coming. The qualification fascination has been in place for decades, and change is a slow process in the policing sector.
“Officers need to accept that they will need to look beyond the walls of their agency and their 40-hour work week to take some responsibility for developing and maintaining their handgun skills.”
Officers need to accept that they will need to look beyond the walls of their agency and their 40-hour work week to take some responsibility for developing and maintaining their handgun skills. I’m sure there will be those who complain that the agency should be providing all the necessary training. You’re preaching to the choir; the agency should do that, but most don’t do that. I have spent more time and money on my professional development than any department I have worked for. If you’re waiting for your agency to provide everything you need, I hope you have a comfortable chair to sit in. You’ll be there a while.
Many of the handgun skills officers want to practice exist in competitive shooting. Every day, average citizens exercise their rights and participate in recreational shooting competitions nationwide. For a few dollars, you can go on the range and shoot fast, move, make decisions, and experience the pressure of finding a balance of speed and accuracy. The war cry from the scared is something about it not being real — tell me how real shooting your qual once a year is? If you think it’s beneath you or not relevant, go and watch one. Children and geriatrics will leave the average officer in the dust. If you aren’t willing to accept some personal responsibility and exhibit humility, then you will have to accept the mediocrity that your agency deems a minimum standard.
Defensive tactics: The reality gap
The defensive tactics data reveal a slightly different but equally concerning picture. While most officers (57.1%) have intermediate-level training, and another 19.7% hold advanced certifications, which is a positive development, the frequency and effectiveness of ongoing training reveal significant problems.
The defensive tactics training schedule is seemingly more regular than firearms training:
| Frequency | Firearms % | Defensive Tactics % |
| Weekly | 0.95 | - |
| Monthly | 11.19 | 4.13 |
| Quarterly | 27.06 | 16.27 |
| Annual | 21.27 | 48.17 |
| Rarely | 20.63 | 23.17 |
| Never | 18.89 | 8.25 |
Less bad stats than firearms don’t necessarily mean “good.” These measures of frequency still show nearly one-third of officers (31.5%) rarely or never receive defensive tactics training beyond their initial certification. This is particularly concerning due to the frequency with which these skills are utilized. There is slightly more faith in the effectiveness of officers’ defensive tactics training compared to firearms. More than half of officers (57%) find their training effective or very effective. That still leaves a whopping 43% considering their training to be ineffective or very ineffective.The most revealing and guiding data comes from the skills and tools officers report using:
- Empty-hand control techniques (91.1%)
- TASER deployment (47.1%)
- Ground fighting techniques (45.6%)
- Baton strikes (10.3%)
- Other (7.7%) — included everything from verbal skills to chemical incapacitant sprays.
Data-driven learning
There is an enormous gap between the frequency of hands-on skills and, well, everything else on the list. I can certainly attest from my experience policing that hands-on was the most frequently utilized technique I used, as well as others. This seems to be where training time and energy would be best spent.
There were a few mentions of multiple officer techniques in the “other” section — I found that to be attention-grabbing too. Most defensive tactics training I see delivered at the academy or in-service level in the U.S. is focused on solo officer approaches. Even Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, although an incredible and useful skillset applicable to LE, is still very much focused on a solo approach. With correctly applied technique, more officers can lead to safer and quicker control of subjects.
There is a pleasing trend of officers waiting for backup and not engaging in solo interactions when circumstances allow. The physical skills that are taught and trained need to catch up to this multi-officer approach and be more team-oriented in their design.
What can we do now to bridge this gap?
As with firearms training, departments must recognize more is required to satisfy the needs of their officers. Unlike firearms, it appears that more officers report supplementing inadequate department training by taking responsibility for their own skills and development outside of duty hours.
In the breakdown of the survey, martial arts of various forms were referenced as off-duty investments made by officers. Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu received a few mentions and has become a very popular influence in law enforcement defensive tactics. Much like firearms competitions, not all aspects will translate to law enforcement work.
A few examples of the disconnect might be that subjects do not have to follow rules, and taking people to the ground isn’t always a tactically sound decision based on the environment. Still, contextual exceptions aside, a few basic Jiu-Jitsu skills can be a game changer. Watching a calm officer patiently and confidently control a subject while the subject flails and wears themselves out also looks much better on camera. Skills that enable calm establishment of dominant control represent a significant leap forward in ensuring the safety of the officer, the subject being controlled and the profession’s reputation.
Scenario training: The missing link
If firearms and defensive tactics training show concerning gaps, scenario-based training reveals a crisis. Only 17.3% of agencies provide simulation training regularly, while 53.8% provide it infrequently, and 28.1% provide none.
Cops rarely agree on anything at all! When consensus is reached, it’s time to stop and pay attention. When asked if simulation training aided in recognizing high-risk incidents, only 2.6% of officers disagreed. Research has shown that the ability to recognize cues and improve decision-making can stem from quality scenario training. One of the most common representations of this in another industry is flight simulators.
Officers consistently call for integrated, scenario-based training rather than isolated skill development. Real-world encounters don’t separate firearms, defensive tactics and decision-making into neat categories, yet training often does. Part of the beauty of scenario training is that context drives the decision and the skill selection. When you go to the range, you will be shooting, and you probably won’t be talking or making complex decisions. It’s a very defined process limiting broad skill development. In a scenario, you may or may not be using force; like Forrest Gump and his box of chocolates, “You never know what you’re gonna get.” That mystery and potential to draw from a broad set of skills on demand is as close to reality as training can get.
“The reality of the training disparity between what agencies can and will provide, compared to what officers need, is stark.”
Takeaways for agencies
Based on this extensive data, law enforcement agencies must consider fundamental reform of their training. I appreciate that budget constraints are a reality, and there are only a limited number of resources available. For agencies with limited resources, consider hosting training sessions and negotiating free attendance for your staff. It is not uncommon for a private company to offer several complimentary spots to the agency that provides the venue and allows surrounding departments to use it.
Help your motivated officers by supplementing training. Although there may be no budget to support the entire cost of a class, the agency could provide the time, and the officer could cover the tuition. Or any other combination of materials and expenses sharing that supports people in learning and growing.
Find a way to say yes to your motivated people who want to better themselves. They ultimately contribute to your agency’s success. More broadly than those individual encounters, some larger changes will contribute to improved quality of training.
Increase training frequency across all areas
- Move from annual to quarterly or monthly training for all critical skills
- Prioritize ongoing skill maintenance over one-time certifications
Implement integrated scenario training
- Combine firearms, defensive tactics, and decision-making in realistic scenarios
- Use role players and technology to create unpredictable, dynamic training that allows for variability in skill use and decision making to be practiced
Invest in modern training technology
- Beg, borrow, or seek grants for simulation systems that provide consistent, measurable training
- Explore VR and other technologies to maximize training opportunities
Emphasize realistic training environments
- Include low-light, moving target, and cover-based scenarios
- Train in environments that mirror real-world locations
Support officer-initiated training
- Provide tuition reimbursement for relevant outside training
- Recognize and reward officers who pursue additional training
Takeaways for officers
The reality of the training disparity between what agencies can and will provide, compared to what officers need, is stark. This is not a new problem; it has been this way for a long time. Part of the solution is accepting that your agency will not give you everything you need. It is up to you to identify the gap and work to fill it yourself. Your agency probably doesn’t feed you every day, but you don’t go hungry. They likely don’t pay for your socks, and yet you still wear a pair on duty. Take all the training you can get, then work to fill the gap to the best of your time, budget, and ability beyond that.
The path forward
The 1,260 officers who participated in this survey have provided a clear roadmap for training improvement. They want:
- More frequent training across all critical skills
- Realistic, scenario-based preparation that mirrors actual encounters
- Integrated training that combines multiple skills and decision-making
- Access to modern training technology and methods
The data shows officers are eager for better training — they’re even paying for it themselves. The question isn’t whether improved training is needed, but whether agencies will make the investment necessary to provide it.
Officer safety, public safety and community trust all depend on properly trained law enforcement. The officers have informed us of their requirements. Now it’s time for agencies, policymakers, and communities to ensure they get it.
Tactical takeaway
Survey results show a dangerous training gap: officers want frequent, realistic, scenario-based practice, but most agencies still provide little beyond annual qualifications. Until agencies step up, officers must take responsibility to fill the gap themselves.