(October 1, 2021 at 12:06 pm)Angrboda Wrote: There was a court case a few years ago where a department refused to hire a candidate because he scored too highly on an intelligence test. The department's argument was that candidates who are overqualified for the position or too intelligent are at greater odds to leave the department sooner rather than later, costing the department in terms of officer training gone to waste. The department won that case.
How would you respond to such arguments if you were advocating for higher educational standards for police officers?
I liked Boru's compromise where we stop sending cops at all to those situations where a gun isn't needed, focusing on social workers being trained and readily available instead. We'd need more social workers in that capacity but it'd be better I think to just keep police powered weaponry out of there altogether if it's not a situation that calls for such weaponry to be used.
Other than that, I don't know. I don't think looking for lower intelligence officers is a good goal to begin with. So, I'd maybe argue that they should stop putting grunts in a position of power and authority over regular citizens in often complex and emotionally taxing situations.