I think it’s more nefarious than that. Many departments want a good 'ol boys club where they’re the ultimate authority and they want their officers to fall in line rather than question department actions.
Calling 25 years a quarter century is a fun way to make it seem way longer. Precedent is kind of important in law so setting a precedent that says they can discriminate on the basis of IQ is relevant until is overturned. Do you have any articles about a ruling overturning that precedent?
Certain departments specifically have IQ tests, in order to ensure you aren’t smart enough to easily get a better job elsewhere.
I think it’s more nefarious than that. Many departments want a good 'ol boys club where they’re the ultimate authority and they want their officers to fall in line rather than question department actions.
This internet myth has got to die. ONE case in ONE department, a quarter century ago, does not mean it’s a practice.
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/09/nyregion/metro-news-briefs-connecticut-judge-rules-that-police-can-bar-high-iq-scores.html
Calling 25 years a quarter century is a fun way to make it seem way longer. Precedent is kind of important in law so setting a precedent that says they can discriminate on the basis of IQ is relevant until is overturned. Do you have any articles about a ruling overturning that precedent?