Heros

The recent killing of a St. Paul Police officer has sparked a lot of controversy in the last week. Doug Grow wrote an interesting column about it a couple of days ago.

I wonder about what makes a hero? Is there a difference between being a hero and doing our job? Or does doing one's job when it is inherantly difficult or dangerous make one a hero?

My perspective has always been that the term "hero" has been reserved for those who have taken actions of bravery above and beyond what is normally expected of them.

So are the soldiers who go to Iraq automatically heros because they are doing their job? Or should that term be reserved for those who distinguish themselves on behalf of their brothers and sisters?

Is Sgt. Vick a hero because he died in the line of duty? Or was he just doing his job. Everything I have read/heard about him would indicate that he would shrug off the term/title of hero.

In no way is this intended to belittle his life, or his sacrifice. But language is powerful.

I know someone who was in the first gulf war. He was a photo processor on an aircraft carrier. When he returned home he received a special payment from the State of Minnesota given to all gulf war vets...sort of a "bonus" for the nature of his service. He also drives around with a "Gulf War Vet" license plate.

He sat in the bowels of an aircraft carrier during one of the shortest wars in human history. What did it last? Wasn't it something like 100 hours? His aircraft carrier was never at risk. He developed photos and never saw combat. His job was like that of the people who work at Target processing 1 hour photos.

Hero?

I know this isn't the same as Sgt. Vick. But we call this fallen police officer a hero. We call the gulf war vet/photo processor a hero. We call those who sacrifice their lives to save their brothers in combat heros.

At what point do we begin to lose the meaning of the word?