Small people on the police force...

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/9317373/detail.html
I saw the footage of this. Lucky for the chick, a good Samaritan helped her out. This reminds me of when that [guy] down in Georgia went nuts in the courthouse while he was being watched by a guard that was elderly and unarmed. He overpowered her, of course, and went on to kill several people.

Now we have this. I'm 5'4" myself and know my limitations. Granted, I'm as small as this chick but I guarantee you I'm stronger. Is it un-PC to not allow short weak people from serving as cops? What's your opinion...

I dunno Dave, if you ban short arses on the force what would you do if a gang of criminal dwarves comes into town? Eh? ~;)

I think it is completely reasonable to have physical requirements for some jobs. Being an equal opportunity employer does not mean that you have an equal opportunity of letting your employees get their @$$ handed to them by someone they are not suited to guard.

That tall SOB will probably try to sue the Good Samaritan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

I dunno Dave, if you ban short arses on the force what would you do if a gang of criminal dwarves comes into town? Eh? ~;)

---

You call Santa and let him know his elves are loose again...:laugh4:

In all probability that police force had a minimum height of 5' for female applicants, maybe 5' 1". For men it might be 5' 5". Granted that is for the RCMP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lars573

In all probability that police force had a minimum height of 5' for female applicants, maybe 5' 1". For men it might be 5' 5". Granted that is for the RCMP.

---

How is a 5' tall woman going to take down someone that's over 6' without using weapons, which liberals would have a fit about, or risking others around her and the suspect while she's trying to subdue the suspect. I think this is complete PC BS that puts everyone in danger. i know it makes the bleeding heart feel good when you see a midget "overcoming" their "shortcomings" but is it worth risking the lives of others in order to help someone's self esteem or to give a PC liberal lunatic a warm fuzzy?

I don't think little people should be cops or disabled people.


I was watching an episode of "cops" (great show btw) and a one legged officer was chasing a druggy! the druggy was easily outrunning him the only reason the cop got him is because the druggy fell:wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

How is a 5' tall woman going to take down someone that's over 6' without using weapons, which liberals would have a fit about, or risking others around her and the suspect while she's trying to subdue the suspect. I think this is complete PC BS that puts everyone in danger. i know it makes the bleeding heart feel good when you see a midget "overcoming" their "shortcomings" but is it worth risking the lives of others in order to help someone's self esteem or to give a PC liberal lunatic a warm fuzzy?

---

Part of the physical qulaifications for joining the RCMP is a shove simulator. It's about the shape of a punching bag and it's on a metal pole that is sprung to simiulate a 175 pound person pushing against you, and it moves latterally too. And you have to be able to hold it back (IE not lose your footing and fall over) and manuver it around. It's really and endurance test. You have to hold this thing for a set amount of time (don't remember how long though). The mounties say that this is practice for subdoing a suspect. And later on you practice against real people, your class mates. IIRC they taugh the women how to take down a man taller than them. Without using his manberries for a speed bag.


Before you ask why I refer to the RCMP so much. I saw a documentary about the Mountie acadamy and all the training they do their. And in high school I went to a carrer seminar thing the mounties were having. They both said the same thing.

Quote:

---

How is a 5' tall woman going to take down someone that's over 6' without using weapons,

---

With training.

Exactly. If you are good enough, you are big enough.

it might be funny to watch a little policeman getting his ass handed to him in the middle of th street....but I doubt that´s the most efficient way to keep the streets safe...

Huh, the funny thing is that this whole escapade started when she pulled the driver over for not wearing a seatbelt (a BS law), and then apparently searched the passenger (is that legal?) before trying to make the arrest.

And DD has a great point about standards being thrown out because they're 'discriminatory', like old firefighting requirements and feminazis.

Crazed Rabbit

Are you serious? someone under 5,8 trying to tackle a six footer and over.
WTF?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bopa the Magyar

Are you serious? someone under 5,8 trying to tackle a six footer and over.
WTF?

---

Trust me, it's not a pretty sight. I learned martial arts a while back, for recreational purposes, and the absolute best fighter there (who could literally beat anyone, if one does not count the trainer) was this slip of a girl, 5'1'', maybe 5'2''.

Police are there to protect, not beat up. Even in the example that you give, it would be bettter for a burly 6 footer to merely be there than the short gal. Sure, she can floor any trouble makers better than the other, but the 6 footer will be better at keeping the peace. Some jobs in the police force like and other are what one appears to be, not what one is. Those that are not able to be passively intimidating should be given desk jobs - or become a Merc if you really want to fight - there offence is the objective.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keba

Trust me, it's not a pretty sight. I learned martial arts a while back, for recreational purposes, and the absolute best fighter there (who could literally beat anyone, if one does not count the trainer) was this slip of a girl, 5'1'', maybe 5'2''.

---

Exception to the rule.:bow:

Ummm no. Properly trained a height difference is a none issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lars573

Ummm no. Properly trained a height difference is a none issue.

---

@ me?

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lars573

Ummm no. Properly trained a height difference is a none issue.

---

Yup, that training worked well for that little gal didn't it. She would have had a better chance of subdueing the suspect with giving him a lewinsky, I'm sure she could do that better than her lame attempt of playing cop. :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A.Saturnus

With training.

---

And You can pay the extra tax dollars it takes to get the little twig to do something a bigger person could already do:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lars573

Yes.

---

Statistically I’ll bet a 5’2” slip of a girl that is the best fighter in class is the exception to the rule. I didn’t say anything about training, just that she was the exception to the rule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

Yup, that training worked well for that little gal didn't it. She would have had a better chance of subdueing the suspect with giving him a lewinsky, I'm sure she could do that better than her lame attempt of playing cop.

---

The kind of training I'm talking about is as much mental as it is physical. An attitude and having control of the situation. Which can be taugh, but is much better if it's already there to be fostered. I guess being raised by a bossy and domineering mother colours my view of what women can do even though there smaller. I don't treat my sister that much differently than my brother (I just punch her less). Being a girl is not an excuse not being able (or not allowed) to do something far as I'm concerned.

So you think women should be allowed to go on the front lines during a war?

I personally think that women should be allowed on the front line as long as they are as able as men. Basically no allowances.

And sure, if they get taken prisoner there is a chance they'll be gang raped until the end of the war.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Police are there to protect, not beat up. Even in the example that you give, it would be bettter for a burly 6 footer to merely be there than the short gal. Sure, she can floor any trouble makers better than the other, but the 6 footer will be better at keeping the peace. Some jobs in the police force like and other are what one appears to be, not what one is. Those that are not able to be passively intimidating should be given desk jobs - or become a Merc if you really want to fight - there offence is the objective.

---

Well, I guess police departments get so many applicants that they can be very choicy...

Let me tell you all a story a medic once told me. In the hospital he was working a while back, they once had a problem with a woman who has brought into the psychatric department (against her will, obviously). She was brought by firemen because the ambulance didn't dare to approach her. Well, the was also about 1.60m (about 5 foot 2 inch), and around 50 years old. She suffered from a condition called polytoxicomanie - that's what you may get if you take speed, crack, PCP, alcohol and some other stuff at the same time. Now, the firemen tried to get her from their truck into a room in the hospital, about 50 meters. They got help from a few policemen, called just for the case. That were maybe 10 men. It took them nearly 2 hours to get her from the truck to the room. Several of the men involved got rips, noses or arms broken. A doctor who just looked what was going but wasn't actually involved got his nose broken in passing. When they finally got her to that room, they tried to bind her to the bed but it was impossible. It was only possible when a psychatrist came and injected her a drug with the description "for the raging insane".
Now, I don't mean to say that that woman would have done well in the situation discussed here (as she probably would have eaten that guy), only that size can be deceiving.

And finally: yes, I'm willing to pay the extra tax money to keep policemen and women trained.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

Statistically I’ll bet a 5’2” slip of a girl that is the best fighter in class is the exception to the rule. I didn’t say anything about training, just that she was the exception to the rule.

---

Actually, there were two of the type ... plus one that was 5'6''.

I wouldn't underestimate short people, proper training and anyone can knock down a much larger opponent without training ... when both have similar levels of training, the one with the greater weight usually wins, if he knows proper tactics ... if he doesn't, he's dead.

As you probably know, when we use our muscles we don't use 100% of their power. There are neural pathways that block the ability of the muscle to pass a certain threashold (you might notice this if you're forcing someone's arm and suddenly they stop resisting).

There are situations when this is overridden. Normally it falls under the "fight or flight" - where people have lifted massive weights. Here the body (somehow - don't ask me) turns the safeties off as failing to give 100% today will mean there isn't a tomorrow. Usually severe suppression of pain goes along with this. It's the same in sport when you notice the massive bruise on yourself after the game, but barely can remember when the injury occurred as you were so hyped up.

In a dyed in the wool junkie like that, something similar is probably responsible. Her muscles are working at a level of intensity that is likely to cause major damage to tendon, bone and muscle, but her brain is so messed up it doesn't care.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

So you think women should be allowed to go on the front lines during a war?

---

Canada already does that. And I whole heartedly agree. The location of your reproductive organs isn't a mearure of what you can do.

Quote:

---

Here the body (somehow - don't ask me) turns the safeties off

---

Adrenaline?