What's a Hero?

Heard it on the news today: some six year old kid found his grandma lying unconscious on the floor, so he called 911. Turns out she's diabetic and her insulin levels were way low. It's nice the kid called 911, but now they're talking about a citation, and giving him an award for heroism.
Is he really a hero?
An Aussie soldier in Afghanistan was cleaning his gun, and he shot himself. True, he died of head injuries after a shooting accident, but he wasn't a sniper on a war mission, so they must have felt a little weird when the flags were flying at half staff, assuming that's an honour reserved for heroes.
There are more examples I'm sure, but this is sufficient to make my point.
Now, if the kid had dragged his grandmother down several flights of stairs, encountered scary wild animals along the way, or if he had to endure blazing guns or fire, he could deserve the title "hero". But all he did was what anyone else would do. In fact, didn't a dog once press those numbers to get help for his unconscious master? or bark, or something?
As for the soldier, well there was more ineptitude there than patriotism or courage, so you can't really call him a hero.
There's an old saying, "Too much of anything spoils it." Do you think, if we keep handing out awards and calling people heroes when it's not warranted, that soon the real heroes will just get a mediocre response, an only mildly enthusiastic "hooray for you"?
If someone is a hero, then let's honour them. But if they just did something anyone else would have done in the same situation, and there are no hurricanes or fires or wild animals involved, then let's save the awards for those who are truly deserving.