A man whose bid to become a police officer was rejected after he scored too high on an intelligence test has lost an appeal in his federal lawsuit against the city.
I wonder how many precincts practice this policy. Might explain some of the run ins I've had with some peace officers.
My guess is that it's nearly completely saturated across the nation with this. Departments talk and if one finds a 'better' way of doing things or a way to 'save' money then it will spread like wild fire eventually. I know lots of intelligent people who are currently job seeking that are MORE than qualified to be in LE and keep getting denied w/o making it very far in the process. Most all of them have a squeeky clean record so it has to be something else and most only take the test (which the normally get far and away the highest grade on out of the entire group taking the test at that time) and might get to the integrity interview before being washed for almost no reason or stupid little reasons. I know LOTs of people in LE that have done FAR worse things and got right past that portion of the hire process. Nothing seems to make sense but this actually dose because the people who can't seem to make it are what I would consider quite intelligent. Seems it would be easier to say 'You stole a paper clip from your work 10 years ago' than 'you're too smart to be a cop' so that's what they go with.
"shown a rational basis for the policy" is a slippery slope when it comes to this type of discrimination....... which is exactly what this is DISCRIMINATION period
many could show a "rational" basis not to hire blacks or women.......... is this really that different?
every year we hear about all these lawsuits being one because of standardized testing favoring white people when it comes to promotions or hirings......... isnt this the same thing...... standardized testing favoring stupid people?
Not to say that I think all speeding is perfectly safe, but to assign an arbitrary number that was established more than a few decades ago when cars were less road worthy than they are today seems a little insincere when trying to justify it in the name of safety. I feel safer going 65-70 than I do going 55 on some roads out here due in part to the average speed of everyone's travels as well as from just a standpoint of keeping myself engaged to the road and my surroundings. If I drop down to 55 on the highway, I find the commute tends to lull me to sleep.
Not everyone can drive fast. Some might and many cannot. So everyone, regardless of their skill must obey the limit. Why not 100-125? Surely some cars can handle the speed and some drivers can handle the speed, but do you want your 16 year old daughter being allowed to drive at 125, or driving on roads where high speeds are allowed?
Someone must set a limit.
"shown a rational basis for the policy" is a slippery slope when it comes to this type of discrimination....... which is exactly what this is DISCRIMINATION period
many could show a "rational" basis not to hire blacks or women.......... is this really that different?
every year we hear about all these lawsuits being one because of standardized testing favoring white people when it comes to promotions or hirings......... isnt this the same thing...... standardized testing favoring stupid people?
If I remember correctly, in the UK if you're tested to be bright enough you get the opportunity to be fast-tracked when it comes to a career in the police force. That's a better solution to the problem of boredom/retention than to block the brightest lights from joining at all.
I've been saying for years now we need to do away with ALL affirmative action because it serves only to perpetuate racism and prejudice. Funny how minorities speak up strongly against being judged by the color of their skin until it's to help them then mum's the word. Racism is alive and well in this country but the tide has turned on who it favors in some areas. Something tells me Dr MLK Jr didn't have Affirmative Action in mind when he preached equality. Doesn't seem very equal to me when companies are required to hire based on the color of applicant's skin.
Perhaps this guy should have killed some brain cells just before taking that test and while on duty to ensure he's stupid enough to avoid a disciplinary.That sounds WAY too efficient to be taken under consideration here in the US... home of bass ackwards politics and horseshit bureaucratic worthlessness. Here we reward the stupid & irresponsible and our brightest minds continue to seek active employment at any level. It's an exercise in futility here and the smarter you are the more annoying it is. I see people go through life completely oblivious to this sort of thing and care only to watch TMZ to see what their favorite star is up to currently and consider drinking copious amounts of brain cell killing liquids so I can quietly join them and enjoy a happier life.
I think the US is about the same. I would think the best and brightest should be pushed into public service, instead of being left underutilized. A sad state of affairs. That said, people with a higher IQ will get bored easily - understandable I guess, but thats exactly why they need to be put into important, demanding, but rewarding roles.
I meant public service without capitalisation - not just governmental workers bad choice of words. I'd doubt that your ethnicity/gender would be that much of a disadvantage, but if you like your job, you like itI like to think I am a smart guy, I'm a MENSA member, and I would never go to public service. I could never come close to making what I make in the private sector. And as a white male in public service I am at the most disadvantage for promotions.
I have really menial job when you get down to it, my most exciting part is monitoring, and checking the figures were getting back from the sensors. But I'm not bored with my job. Its like a frat house, yet with no drinking.
I'd doubt that your ethnicity/gender would be that much of a disadvantage...
Why would you think that? Because that's the way it should be? Well, thanks to Affirmative Action you would be incorrect as it applies to government positions unfortunately. Any and ALL laws pertaining to skin color need to be abolished entirely and this starts and ends with Affirmative Action. Many states had a bill on the books to overturn this a couple years ago and several passed them. I was disappointed when people who opposed it in my state (Colorado) called it the 'Angry white man's bill' and managed to get it shot down 51% to 49% when the dust settled. Laws regarding race should NOT be allowed regardless of if it's to help a race or hurt a race because in the end it hurts everyone.
I would prefer if people were hired and promoted on merit, giving preference to unqualified people works out bad for everyone long term.
Not everyone can drive fast. Some might and many cannot. So everyone, regardless of their skill must obey the limit. Why not 100-125? Surely some cars can handle the speed and some drivers can handle the speed, but do you want your 16 year old daughter being allowed to drive at 125, or driving on roads where high speeds are allowed?
Someone must set a limit.
wow that is a sad story, i personaly scored a 126 a few years back by when i was also diagnosed with severe ADD, that is absolutely ridiculous to think that high IQ people "would get bored so we don't higher them"... that is absolutely BS, if a man wants to server his country or his county IQ should have nothing to do with it, they should be physically adequate. i see too many "large" police officers i could easily out-run without even trying
lol wellll i know they don't but i still think its unacceptable that they aren't READY to run like hell.
if i ever need the police and the first officer to respond is inadequate to protect me or pursue a suspect i would be very pissed off at the division
We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.