I highly recommend Michael Conti's "Police Pistolcraft: The Reality-Based New Paradigm of Police Firearms Training". Conti is a believer is point shooting, but I think the book has value to the most sight-oriented shooter or instructor (and I tend to be a believer in getting on the sights). Conti ran the first fulltime firearms training unit in the Massachusetts State Police and created a "house of horrors" based on Rex Applegate's training.
He noted some differences in performance in the house of horrors. In a traffic stop scenario, newer troopers responded much more decisively that experience road dogs. He attributed this, I believe correctly, to new troopers having just been graduated from an academy that taught any car stop could be your last. Experienced guys and girls, having stopped hundreds or thousands of cars before going through the training often reacted less effectively.
More to the point of this topic was the question of what units performed better or worse in the house of horrors. I would have expected, as did Conti that it would have been SWAT (or STOP as MSP calls them) or some high-speed fugitive apprehension or gang unit. Nope, it was the forensic science unit. These were troopers who went from major crime scene to major crime scene, largely murders and other violent crimes. Conti attributed this, as do I, to the fact these troopers knew without any doubt that that dangerous, violent people were in the world (or, at least, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) and that immediate response to a deadly threat must be met appropriately.
County forensic sciences is largely civilian now, but I wouldn't have doubted the hesitation of the sworn officers back in the day to drop hammer if needed.