Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops:

[quest7]

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.

 

[TxGoat]

I wonder how many precincts practice this policy. Might explain some of the run ins I've had with some peace officers.

 

[OstrichSaK]

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.

 

[TxGoat]

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.

It's actually sad, but I can somewhat see where each department is coming from. I knew a guy in law enforcement that had a hard time stopping speeders who were driving over the speed limit but driving prudent. His logic was that if you're driving over the speed limit but doing so safely then he didn't think it warranted a stop. If you aren't someone that would put much thought into such things then you'd probably do better as a police officer.

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.

 

[copestag]

"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?

 

[Bob Maxey]

"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?

"Your're over qualified." was one popular excuse. Although, I am not sure how many were not hired because they were over qualified.

One problem is if I start a company, toss all race or gender considerations out the window and hire only the best possible people, I am in trouble if they turn out to be all white.

 

[Bob Maxey]

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.

 

[OstrichSaK]

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.

Lowest common denominator. We all get punished for the stupidest or most uncoordinated ones among us unfortunately.

 

[OstrichSaK]

"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?

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.

 

[Sak01]

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.

 

[OstrichSaK]

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.

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.

 

[ElasticNinja]

The average is 104? Surely it would be a bit higher? The average IQ in the EU is about 100, 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.

 

[Bob Maxey]

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.

I have always wondered about the logic as well. I cannot legally base a hiring decision on color because that is discrimination. But I can hire minority workers specifically because they are minorities and keep out of court.

I prefer to hire the best and to hell with their color, even if they are all black. I would be applauded for that statement until I use the same criteria and end up with an all white workforce. Then without much investigation, I am a racist.

 

[Sak01]

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.

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.

tbf, I can see where the police force is coming from but the solution they've implemented is so poorly thought out that you have to question the IQ of the minds that came up with it.

 

[xeroxtraum]

Wow, if you didn't include a link with this I wouldn't have even believed it. It seems there's no limit to bureaucratic idiocy. Given my run-ins with LEO's, I would think that they'd start recruiting based on higher intelligence. If he's intelligent, then would he not also climb the ranks higher and thereby skirt said boredom of beat-cop police work?

We need intelligent detectives badly. Things don't really work like they show in CSI... not at all...

 

[TJGoSurf]

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 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.

 

[ElasticNinja]

I 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 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 it

 

[OstrichSaK]

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.

 

[ElasticNinja]

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 think its important to try to help those who are/were disadvantaged in a reasonable manner. I would prefer if people were hired and promoted on merit, giving preference to unqualified people works out bad for everyone long term.

 

[OstrichSaK]

I would prefer if people were hired and promoted on merit, giving preference to unqualified people works out bad for everyone long term.

Bingo. This is what TJGoSurf was making reference to because in most forms of government employment you aren't hired or promoted on the basis of your merit entirely which is how it should be.

 

[TxGoat]

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.

My point is that the limit was set what 30+ years ago when cars weren't what they are today? And lets face it, "Fast" can be described as 30 MPH (would be faster than the fastest man) since it's all relative. I'm not saying we need to bump up the speed limits to triple digits, but that 55 MPH served its purpose back when it first came out and when you take the average speeds of the average driver on the highway, it's certainly not 55 MPH which is typically the speed limit for a lot of highways.


I could say that the speed limit should be lowered all the way to 20 MPH since sometimes drivers are impaired by texting, drinking, driving with a hazardous load, or just outright old age so maybe we should lower it to accommodate those deviations as well? If you lack the reflexes to safely handle a vehicle at 70 or 80 MPH then you're probably not going to fare much better at 55-60.

The Germans don't demonize speed on their Autobahn and are actually much more courteous when it comes to driving on their roads, and yes they've been known to hit triple-digits from time to time, not that that's what I'd like to see here.

 

[EarlyMon]

The 55 thing was a Nixon mandate to save gas. It had nothing to do with safety or what the cars of the day were capable of.

 

[OstrichSaK]

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

In real life, most cops don't do much running.

 

[OstrichSaK]

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

I think you misunderstood what I said. They DON'T run. They drive their cars really fast at times but most departments state clearly that if someone runs... let them. Very few foot chases actually happen these days despite what you see on COPs. It would have to be a VERY wanted individual for them to pursue. As for running to protect you, that's also not really what they're there for generally. They do a LOT more report taking and question asking then then they ever do crime prevention which is something that most people don't get. This is exactly why I carry a firearm which I train with because I know if I need them they won't be there. That's just the way the real world works. But I do agree they should be in shape, strong, intelligent and trained well enough to hand most any situation thrown at them. I've seen the hiring process first hand however and that's just not how it works. A small Asian female will take precedence over a larger, in-shape and very strong male who fits every other part of criteria otherwise. It's sad really.

 

[Frisco]

The department doesn't seem to be saying that those with high IQ scores are "too smart to be a police officer." They seem to be saying that they've seen loss of revenue due to a discovered link between higher IQ scores and trained personnel loss.

In a way they also seem to be admitting that they don't know how to deal with that the ways some companies do: by shunting over qualified employees to more sophisticated sections of the company so they'll be challenged enough to stay on force. Instead they're just shutting the door on them at the point of entry.