A commonly accepted definition of hero is "performing a duty and/or serving others, even at great danger to oneself, often for little or no reward". So "how dangerous is the job?" seems relevant to me.
> there is a world of difference between professions where accidents are common, and a profession where humans may be actively trying to kill you.
A large fraction of police deaths on the job are traffic accidents.
> So "how dangerous is the job?" seems relevant to me.
How does the comparative danger of fields change how dangerous something is? If someone said "Shaq is really tall", would a reasonable response be "No he isn't. Yao Ming is taller"?
> A large fraction of police deaths on the job are traffic accidents.
Yes, that is one way cops die. But this seems decidedly different contextually than the dangers faced by, say, pizza delivery drivers, who also frequently die in car accidents. Presumably, police officers die in car accidents because they are rushing to the scene of a crime or to a place where someone needs help. Pizza delivery drivers die in car accidents commonly because they are rushing to improve the tip they might get, or to be able to deliver more pizzas and get more tips.
> If someone said "Shaq is really tall", would a reasonable response be "No he isn't. Yao Ming is taller"?
If Shaq and Yao played on the same team and Shaq alone started demanding special accommodations due to his height (like extra-large showers or something) that were prohibitively expensive, and refused to play until he got his way, that would be a perfectly valid response. Sound crazy? It's still saner than some people seriously defending cops breaking the law because their job is dangerous. Give me a break.
> there is a world of difference between professions where accidents are common, and a profession where humans may be actively trying to kill you.
A large fraction of police deaths on the job are traffic accidents.