Trooper Down! by Marie Bartlett Read Free Book Online Page B

they’ll be gone from home half their lives and their wives will be doing all the grocery shopping and raising the kids. I tell them they can’t go to beer joints and nightclubs because people will watch and judge them by their actions. I tell them they’ll have to move whenever and wherever the patrol commander wants them to go and they’ll be lucky if they get stationed within a hundred miles of home.
    â€œI tell them that law enforcement is one of the worst jobs in the world as far as the pay and the hours are concerned. Then I tell them if they don’t want to meet all of our requirements, or no longer think they want to be a highway patrolman, they’re free to go. We want each person to make the decision about what he really wants to do.”
    Those who stick around for the second phase of the screening fill out a series of forms and write a narrative explaining their reasons for joining the highway patrol. Applicants are then given a psychological test that measures their attitudes about use of force, the role of authority, race relations, and police work in general.
    Steve Wollack, a California psychologist who designs attitude tests for a number of highway patrols around the nation, says he’s found that, contrary to public opinion, there’s no single personality “type” who goes into law enforcement as a career.
    But according to Lieutenant Day, who’s had fifteen years of experience in screening potential troopers, there is a “typical” highway patrol applicant. The average cadet, says Day, is a white male, twenty-two years old, and a high school graduate (though an increasing number are college-educated). He often has conservative political opinions and a prior connection to law enforcement.
    The psychological test that applicants undergo is followed by a basic reading and writing exam, then a two-hour physical skills course (also designed by Wollack) that simulates on-the-job experiences, from changing a flat tire while being timed to removing an “injured” person from a burning vehicle.
    Until 1983, the North Carolina Highway Patrol had height requirements that excluded anyone under five feet six, a requirement that eliminated otherwise qualified men and women. Part of the reason for this restriction was the patrol’s belief that a smaller person, particularly a female, could not physically handle the job. The other part was pure public relations: since 1929 the patrol had built its“don’t-mess-with-me” reputation on the size and toughness of its men.
    â€œWhen I was growing up, no one in their right mind would jump on a highway patrolman, because they knew he’d be a good-sized fella,” said a trooper who bemoans the change in standards. “Now it happens all the time. Size may not have anything to do with a person’s ability to do the job, but I think it does have something to do with the patrol’s image.”
    Others disagree and say the concept of the “big, bad patrolman” was due for a change.
    â€œIt used to be that the meanest kid on the block got the job because he could physically handle any situation,” said a ten-year trooper. “So here you had these big, robust men who didn’t have a lot of education, but who could box your jaws in a heartbeat if you stepped out of line.
    â€œToday, we realize that we need more education and training so we can learn how to deal with people intelligently and avoid confrontations.”
    In an interesting aside, police studies have shown that short and medium-height officers demonstrate a
greater 
propensity for aggression than their taller counterparts, refuting the argument that tall officers make better cops. The studies went on to conclude that despite being more aggressive, smaller officers have learned to hold such tendencies within acceptable bounds so that they don’t reflect negatively on themselves, their department, or the