Heros

Why do we have so many heroes? Everyone seems to be a hero nowadays. Sports figures are "heroes" when all they do is play a sport well, even if their personal life is a disaster. Why isn't a CEO with an impeccable personal life a hero when he or she runs a company well. Why is a drug addict a hero for recovering from a life of drug use while a person who has never used drugs is not considered a hero? What happened to the days when heroes did heroic things?

Is a police officer or fire fighter a hero for saving a life? Is a father a hero for saving his child from a burning house? Is Jessica Lynch a hero for surviving a war? (Even she says she is a survivor, not an hero.) Is a soldier a hero for rescuing Jessica? I say "No!" These are people who have a job to do. They chose to do the job and they have a duty and a responsibility to perform their job, no matter how dangerous the job may be. It is their responsibility to put their lives in danger.

If a fireman refused to go into a burning house to save a person, he or she would be subject to disciplinary action and possibly, criminal action. The same holds true for police officers and military personnel. Soldiers are not heroes for surviving the injuries of war. They deserve medical care, they may be entitled to disability pay, and they should be thanked for doing their job well, if, in fact, they did their job well. Just because one is injured does not mean he or she did his or her job well.

I support the definition of an hero as set forth by the Carnegie Hero Fund Commission. The Carnegie Medal of Honor has been issued (sometimes with a cash ward) since 1904 to civilians who knowingly risk their own lives to an extraordinary degree while saving or attempting to save the life of another person. To receive the award, the act of rescue must be one in which no full measure of responsibility exists between the rescuer and the rescued. Persons NOT eligible for awards are:

• Those whose duties in following their regular vocations require them to perform such acts are not heroes, unless the rescues are clearly beyond the line of duty. (A regular citizen can watch a person drown without trying to rescue the person and not be civilly or criminally liable, but an on duty life guard may be sued or even charged for not attempting a rescue. A regular citizen may be a hero for saving a person from drowning, but an on duty life guard who saves the person is only doing his or her job.)
• Members of the immediate family are not heroes, except in cases of outstanding heroism where the rescuer loses his or her life or is severely injured. (Parents are required to risk their lives in protection of their minor children.)
• Members of the armed services are not heroes. (They have their own award system, as do police officers and fire fighters.)
• Children cannot be heroes because the Commission considers them to be too young to comprehend the risks involved.
• Persons who caused the problem that led to a rescue being necessary cannot be heroes. (One cannot intentionally set a house on fire and then be a hero for saving people inside the house)
• People who recklessly risk their lives, even if it is to help another, cannot be heroes. (A person who jumps off the Golden Gate Bridge to save another person who has just jumped is not a hero. He or she is an idiot.)

Does a true hero, milk his or her hero status for personal gain? Senators John McCain and John Kerry were awarded military hero status over 30 years ago, and they still use it in expectation of getting more votes because of it. What about the thousands of other military heroes who came home and lived their lives in anonymity? They didn't and still don't think they deserved special status because they were just doing their duty. Why do some politician heroes think they are unique and deserve to be rewarded year after year after year? .