I agree 100% with you on this one, stm4710. And I mean no disrespect towards any woman LEO anywhere. But the minimum physical requirements are there for a reason; they are a quantitive standard of physical fitness level necessary to perform the duties of the job. If you can't meet these physical requirements, you shouldn't be allowed to work the job.stm4710";p="60131 said:Women want the same job and responsibility, pass the same test. [-X
I want to know my female partner is going to have the strength to pull my fat ass out of a burning building when the defication hits the oscillation, while following a hose line out down a smoke filled,super heated hallway with collapseing walls.........cause you aint got to time to wait for backup.
I had to take a PT test once when I had to drag a realistically weighed manikan 150 feet. That simulated me dragging my partner out of the area. Now why should that standard be any different for men rather then women? If safety lay 150 feet away, I would rather my partner be able to carry or drag me the entire 150 feet to safety, rather then 2/3rds the distance. Some women I know have said, "well thats not fair, women are made differently." Thats true, women aren't, but how fair is it to the officer who gets left behind or can't be carried to safety because his partner couldn't make it the 150 feet? Just my two cents...
As a disclaimer, without going into specifics, I had a female fellow soldier drag my lard ass out of a bad situation, and I watched a recruit in Basic finish her APFT run with a fractured ankle, so I have no problems with women in the service or police... I would just perfer we all get held to the same standard.
Seperate but equal standards, I don't think so.