Standards

This one amazes me. I mean, okay you have a quota of new recruits you need for your operation. Fair enough, as you need to grow, and all that, and I can see where you might want to look at the standards you require before you hire someone.

Sure, ideally you want the cream, but hey, you can't always get the cream, right?

Fine, if you are digging a ditch, filling in potholes, but not fine if you are giving them a gun, a badge, or a license to kill. I am sorry, but I don't want some high school dropout, or failure, to become a cop and working the streets I live on.

I also don't want someone who can't run a set distance, without puffing and wheezing, because I would kind of like them to catch the crook, not wind up in hospital with a coronary. At the same time, if they can't catch them, sure as hell don't want them using their gun either, I mean the fleeing felon might simply be a shoplifter.

Nor do I want some gang member, or drug addict, to get in, simply because they met the height requirement, or were the only want interested in the signing bonus, to wind up learning how to use a M16 or drive an Abrams Tank.

Yet up here, the RCMP are thinking of lowering their standards, for recruits, which just, well, makes me nervous. Of course, the US Army has done that already, and well, just how well is that war going in Iraq?

Instead of lowering the standards, common sense tells me, we should be looking at why we can't get enough people to meet those standards. Is there a dearth of them, or is the remuneration, the benefits, simply not up to par, in enticing those kind of candidates to join?

Seems today, we automatically go for the easy solution, which is to simply drop the standards. Only problem is, eventually you hit rock bottom, and I don't know, sure don't want those kind of people in charge of looking after my streets, how about you?

Also, kind of begs the question, why is it in economic hard times, we cut police, fire, & ambulance services? Aren't those the things we will need more of, not less?