This is not an OC issue (unless you OC by walking around with your gun in your hand or pointed at your head, ignoring orders to drop it), it is giving facts and keeping cops alive (which is what most trainings are about).
Who is going to keep me alive against cops?
I was already starting to think somewhat along Dreamer's lines before I got down to his post. Something is up. Why would a study be done at all? The action/reaction curve is long known?
Since when can "a study" re-write AOJ? That's right. Self-defense law has long included Ability, Opportunity, and Jeopardy/Intent. Gun hanging at side is Ability. Within shooting distance is Opportunity. But, there is no Jeopardy/Intent.
This is police "science" trying to re-write their way around
Tennessee vs Garner.
The SWAT home-invasion angle makes sense to me.
And, we've already read where police in their own minds consider not following their commands belligerent, disorderly, dangerous. They already think that refusing their command equates to dangerousness because an innocent sheep normally just rolls over and obeys their wolf snarls.
If this study idea becomes accepted, its only one step until the detainee who refuses to remove his hand from his pocket gets shot because "he could have a gun in there and could shoot the cop before the cop could react."
To police: Sorry, fellas. Policing has some dangerous points to it. Y'all say so yourselves. You harp on it. You want people to believe it. You need people to believe it. You relish the hero-ship and the benefits (the public's careful avoidance to inquire into the Blue Wall of Silence among those.) The rest of us don't owe it to you to get shot or allow AOJ/I to be re-written just so you can have a little more peace of mind. Especially since you refuse to get rid of the bad cops yourselves.