I find it odd how “rewiring” of a brain in a different pattern equates to “damage” and I’m wagering that the first generations to have telephones, televisions, photographs and recorded sound probably experienced similar “rewiring”…are we “damaged” because our generation grew up during the development of the PC and video game? Its far to convenient how “the new generation” always seems to be “broken” in some way.

Similarly, I’m leery of LTC Grossmans deductive leap that violent video games can bear the lions share of the blame for school shootings and violence. There seems to be human tendency to place the bulk of the “blame” on one element of what I see as a complex web of influences and causes in human behavior.

On the flip side…I think that there is a “reverse generational relationship” going on in police administration. The senior leadership tends to be the “older generation” that sometimes believes that their way was the “best” way and the “new kids” are all screwed up from all that rock n roll and video gaming…the old “for every finger you point-three point back at you” saying may be applicable in some of this “X-Y” stuff.

In this case, rather than creating a blanket “no social networking” policy, police leaders who understand that social networking is part of this generation’s culture will be in a better position to help young officers use it to maximum personal and departmental effectiveness.

I dont know how much stock I place in this whole “X vs. Y” stuff……

The lt. I interviewed at Eustis did bring up the idea that the Gen Y’ers need to be guided in the norms of police culture. They don’t always see that their “sense of entitlement” can be a negative as well as a positive. Some end up doing stupid things, like Tasing a 15-year-old at a drinking party. Others don’t see the value of a long-term career. The latter are the ones that police departments need to be grooming. I see it as a necessary give-and-take of loyalties between the two.

A…YES
A….NO
A….SHIT no would do it for free

I think many of us would do it for almost free hey we do have to support the family but we do really love the job that much.

In some ways I think the smaller agencies (who can’t afford pay incentives to begin with) are better positioned to groom tomorrow’s LE leaders by investing in them. That’s what’s behind a lot of the nonmonetary incentives being put in place in one of the PDs I interviewed, Eustis FL. That said, I think those young people for whom money is more important, will go to the larger agencies. But the smaller ones still have a chance to compete if they have strong nonmonetary support in place.

Does that make more sense?