Funny or sad? Cops not hired because "too smart"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

100 is about average, so 125 is a bit above average.

But really, this doesn't seem right. If someone is smarter, would that not put them in line for a possible promotion to detective or something? If they're smarter, they're likely good with attention to detail or something.

Then again, the idea of IQ is becoming dated. These days, there are about 8 different types of intelligence, including spatial, physical, etc.
 
Officer_Charon

Officer_Charon

Now, I will preface this by saying that there are several "smart" folks that I've worked with who have no business being police officers - they lack sufficient common sense, even while being very book smart.

That being said, I've been assessed with a similar "IQ" to this guy... there really should be no reason to exclude him... the only time IQ should be used as an exclusion in the hiring process, in my opinion, would be due to a lack of ability to understand the written instructions on the test, or to be able to answer in a sufficiently clear manner.

Not sure if this was the actual reason why they decided not to interview the guy, or if it was simply a convenient excuse. The only demographic they provided was his age... maybe they were looking for a younger group of cadets?
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

The case does sound weird. But I want to know what study they use to justify that smart people make bored cops.[DOUBLEPOST=1343234809][/DOUBLEPOST]
Officer_Charon said:
Now, I will preface this by saying that there are several "smart" folks that I've worked with who have no business being police officers - they lack sufficient common sense, even while being very book smart.

That being said, I've been assessed with a similar "IQ" to this guy... there really should be no reason to exclude him... the only time IQ should be used as an exclusion in the hiring process, in my opinion, would be due to a lack of ability to understand the written instructions on the test, or to be able to answer in a sufficiently clear manner.

Not sure if this was the actual reason why they decided not to interview the guy, or if it was simply a convenient excuse. The only demographic they provided was his age... maybe they were looking for a younger group of cadets?
Click to expand...
The guy is 49 now. The issue is nearly 20 years ago.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
Unknown. But they admitted that the person was outside the preferred IQ zone, which is just stupid.

My guess is that it was his age and they didn't want to say that thanks to the possibility of an age discrimination lawsuit. For God sake the guy was 49!!! Who wants to become a beat cop at 49?!?

edit: I missed that it happened in 1996. Holy shit the lawsuit has taken almost 20 years![DOUBLEPOST=1343234959][/DOUBLEPOST]Fuck I'm an idiot. The STORY came out in 2000!!![DOUBLEPOST=1343234998][/DOUBLEPOST]That's what I get for not fully reading something sent to me. I'm a moron.
 
MindDetective

MindDetective

ThatNickGuy said:
Then again, the idea of IQ is becoming dated. These days, there are about 8 different types of intelligence, including spatial, physical, etc.
Click to expand...
Weeellll.....not exactly. Gardner proposed the theory of multiple intelligences a couple decades ago but it is far from widely accepted. There is no established test that has differentiated that there are 9 different intelligences and I would say that it is safe to say that the WISC and the WAIS are the tests most commonly used today, which result in a single IQ score (although contain sub-scales).

That aside, intelligence is very hard to define, and there is little agreement on what it actually is. We have this intuition that people we meet are smart or dumb but defining intelligence (or multiple intelligences) is difficult. IQ does correlate modestly with academic performance but it doesn't seem to correlate very strongly with occupational success. What are probably more important for most professions are specific skill competencies. Some competencies may correlate with IQ but many may not, depending on the skill and profession. All of that said, ruling out people based upon IQ seems discriminatory to me. It is a shame that he won't appeal any further.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
All I know is that everyone on the road with me is a fucking moron. If they were smart they'd get out of my way.
 
Officer_Charon

Officer_Charon

Dave said:
edit: I missed that it happened in 1996. Holy shit the lawsuit has taken almost 20 years![DOUBLEPOST=1343234959][/DOUBLEPOST]Fuck I'm an idiot. The STORY came out in 2000!!![DOUBLEPOST=1343234998][/DOUBLEPOST]That's what I get for not fully reading something sent to me. I'm a moron.
Click to expand...
Welp.... I shot MY credibility in the foot here, too...
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

I missed the 2k date too. Yeah 45 is a bit old for a rookie. Heck that is when a lot of cops retire and move to a slower precinct, so they can double dip.
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Just our comments were rendered invalid.

Sounds more like the agency did not want a rookie that could be retired if he came to the force out of college.[DOUBLEPOST=1343236586][/DOUBLEPOST]
Officer_Charon said:
sixpackshaker actually, 48-49 is when we get some folks signing on, after retiring from the military. The police paycheck supplements their retirement income. not a bad gig, if you can get it...
Click to expand...
Police agencies bend over backwards to hire military types. They are pretty used to the lifestyle.

I found another article from the time of the decision. He was 45, an insurance salesman, that worked for the state on the weekends in the summer as park police.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

an get a job
Dave said:
Unknown. But they admitted that the person was outside the preferred IQ zone, which is just stupid.

My guess is that it was his age and they didn't want to say that thanks to the possibility of an age discrimination lawsuit. For God sake the guy was 49!!! Who wants to become a beat cop at 49?!?

edit: I missed that it happened in 1996. Holy shit the lawsuit has taken almost 20 years![DOUBLEPOST=1343234959][/DOUBLEPOST]Fuck I'm an idiot. The STORY came out in 2000!!![DOUBLEPOST=1343234998][/DOUBLEPOST]That's what I get for not fully reading something sent to me. I'm a moron.
Click to expand...
But at least now we know you can get a job as a policeman...
 
Officer_Charon

Officer_Charon

I know, right... and here I was, thinking that not everybody on a department might even KNOW about any corruption, let alone be able to cover up for it.

Shame on me for assuming I have scruples, I guess...
 
Officer_Charon

Officer_Charon

You know... because I'll cover for someone that makes ME look bad by proxy, and by hiding them, I enable their illegal behavior.

I'ma stop feeding the troll now...
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
The blue wall doesn't mean that they are corrupt or bad people, it just means that they understand the risks and dangers of the job and protect their fellows from outside interference. Does this mean that sometimes they are a little (or even a lot) overzealous when it comes to masking things? Yes. But that doesn't mean that's what happens all the time.

These guys deal all the time with people who lie, cheat, & steal their way through life and can do all of them without a conscience and with absolutely no remorse. Add in people LIKE YOU who read bad into everything they say & do and you have a culture of us vs. them. Here's a news bulletin, Charlie, their actions are not the only ones who started this culture. WE are just as much to blame for that culture as they are.
 
Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

Dave said:
The blue wall doesn't mean that they are corrupt or bad people,
Click to expand...
This is where we disagree.
These guys deal all the time with people who lie, cheat, & steal their way through life and can do all of them without a conscience and with absolutely no remorse. Add in people LIKE YOU who read bad into everything they say & do and you have a culture of us vs. them. Here's a news bulletin, Charlie, their actions are not the only ones who started this culture. WE are just as much to blame for that culture as they are.
Click to expand...
This is where you sound like Col. Jessup from A Few Good Men.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
So to sum up, cops are bad and everyone else is good. Charlie, I hope someday you get a chance to be a cop, or a military person, or a paramedic. Just so you can see how terrible humanity can be and how good these terrible cops can be.

But you never will be any of these things. That takes commitment and sacrifice. I don't see you having any of this when it comes to making the world a better place. You'd rather stand on the sidelines and bitch than do anything real.
 
Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

I looked into being a cop when I was unemployed and in Austin, but I put my eggs in the IRS basket instead.

I never said all cops are bad people. The institution is terrible. Officer Charon has said some things that give me pause, but I don't think he's a bad person.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
But you stated pretty clearly that anyone using the Blue Wall was a bad person. YOU use the Blue Wall, although it's not called that. It's used in families, workplaces, clubs, ...even here. It's a group dynamic thing that is not isolated to the police force. It's exactly the same thing as when a brother protects a brother from something external even as these brothers fight among themselves.

To say that those who use it are bad people are exactly the black/white outlook on things that make you look like a troll or raving lunatic.
 
Bowielee

Bowielee

I've officially stopped listening to anything Charlie has to say. I hate to say it, but the STFU Charlie thing wasn't without reason.

Even when he's making a good point, he sticks it in with his all or none bullcrap which makes no one want to listen to him.
 
Bubble181

Bubble181

Bowielee said:
Even when he's making a good point, he sticks it in with his all or none bullcrap which makes no one want to listen to him.
Click to expand...
This is CDS's number one problem. I sympathize with Charlie on a lot of issues (though I'm a big fan of the police, honest! Don't taze me Charon! Please! ;)), but no matter what discussion he always goes for such an extreme point that any good message gets lost in the noise. "Ban all guns" is stupid, and anyone knows it - it just makes it easy for gun nuts to attack you as being unrealistic. "Abolish all taxes" is ridiculous.
"All cops are bad" as well, though to be fair, that's not what he said originally. "If cops are too smart, they might report corruption" isn't implying all cops are corrupt, at all.
At most, it's implying all cops are either corrupt, or stupid. I can see how you'd take that message out of it. Also false, of course, for clarity. Also, not logically ound to follow from what he says. Only thing he is saying (besides the fact that I'd have assumed his statement was a throwaway joke, taken far too serious by all of you), is that the ones who denied the application might've wanted to hide something or might have had ulterior motives for not allowing these men to join.


Can someone explain why I'm white knighting for Charlie again? Dammit :p
 
Bubble181

Bubble181

mr_thehun said:
Fuck I forgot Charlie was an IRS agent. I thought they had a reputation for being corrupt as well.
Click to expand...
Nah, the IRS are personally selected by Our Lord Jesus Christ and all sanctified before signing their contract. Fraud is physically impossible; it'd burn their flesh off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top