- This topic has 83 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 9, 2013 at 9:08 PM #767723November 9, 2013 at 10:02 PM #767725
CDMA ENG
Participant[quote=CA renter]Paramount,
You should know that I agree with you about how some cops go well beyond reasonable force. Still, those are the “cream of the crop” as far as the candidate pool is concerned. If you doubt it, what do you suggest they do to improve their screening methods?
And those more rigorous “private sector” screenings? Show me one that is more thorough and intrusive…and is not for a government contractor. In every single case that I know of where the “private sector” screening comes anywhere close to this, it’s because they are doing work for the public sector. Yes, when you work for the government (either directly or indirectly), you will likely have to meet higher standards for employment.[/quote]
SEC Licensing.
And there are plenty others…
CE
November 9, 2013 at 10:04 PM #767726CA renter
ParticipantI have a few friends in the financial sector, but they didn’t have to go through anything near as thorough as those I know in these public agencies. Not even close.
November 9, 2013 at 10:06 PM #767727Participant[quote=CA renter]I have a few friends in the financial sector, but they didn’t have to go through anything near as thorough as those I know in these public agencies. Not even close.[/quote]
I disagree…
Pretty much the same thing though it only goes 10 years back.
CE
November 9, 2013 at 10:22 PM #767729Participant[quote=paramount][quote=CA renter]Because government agencies are seen as deep pockets by those who want to sue them. This is precisely why the standards for public employment are so high (as high as they can go relative to the hiring agencies’ resources). One of their top priorities is hiring people who are not a liability to the public agency.
[/quote]
Most police departments are looking for an obedient cross between psycho and sociopaths with a light criminal background IMO.
Meanwhile, the Cream of the Crop work for companies like these:
Apple
Microsoft
Google
Goldman Sachs
Various BioMed Companies
Research Hospitals/UnivSeriously CAr, it’s true. The cream of the crop in general are NOT govt workers.[/quote]
I strongly disagree. The people who work for those companies might be the cream of the crop in their respective fields, but they wouldn’t necessarily be the cream of the crop as far as the law enforcement candidate pool is concerned (probably would NOT be, as a matter of fact). Different requirements and talents required — it’s apples-to-oranges.
November 9, 2013 at 10:22 PM #767728ParticipantDid you even read the LAPD questionnaire to see what kind of information they have to provide? And all of it will be verified.
Do they interview your high school teachers/administrators, neighbors, ex-spouses, childhood friends, etc. for a securities license? No, they do not. Do they perform polygraph tests? Do they have to pass rigorous physical/strength tests? Do they have to pass psychological/emotional/IQ tests? No, they do not.
And I’m not 100% sure (and can’t call any of my friends this late to check), but am 90% sure that people who apply for a securities license do not have to detail and explain every single bit of their debt and expenses — sometimes going back many years. Both might have their credit checked, but the LE hiring process is much more invasive and thorough.
Once again, **not even close.**
November 9, 2013 at 10:25 PM #767730Participant[quote=CA renter]Did you even read the LAPD questionnaire to see what kind of information they have to provide? And all of it will be verified.
Do they interview your high school teachers/administrators, neighbors, ex-spouses, childhood friends, etc. for a securities license? No, they do not. Do they perform polygraph tests? Do they have to pass rigorous physical/strength tests? Do they have to pass psychological/emotional/IQ tests? No, they do not.
And I’m not 100% sure (and can’t call any of my friends this late to check), but am 90% sure that people who apply for a securities license do not have to detail and explain every single bit of their debt and expenses — sometimes going back many years. Both might have their credit checked, but the LE hiring process is much more invasive and thorough.
Once again, **not even close.**[/quote]
Again… it is not the astronaut program and most people off the street could train for the physicality of this exam…
Give me a break on the IQ exam…
CE
November 9, 2013 at 11:37 PM #767733ucodegen
Participant[quote=CA renter]Did you even read the LAPD questionnaire to see what kind of information they have to provide? And all of it will be verified.[/quote]
I can answer quite definitively here.. it is NOT all verified. They don’t have the budget that the DOD has for backgrounds. They don’t have the resources of the NSA and Defense Investigative Services. They also have a shorter time fuse than getting a DOD clearance.[quote=CA renter]And I’m not 100% sure (and can’t call any of my friends this late to check), but am 90% sure that people who apply for a securities license do not have to detail and explain every single bit of their debt and expenses — sometimes going back many years. Both might have their credit checked, but the LE hiring process is much more invasive and thorough.[/quote]
Umm.. not quite. The trick to get something past them is NOT to state it. Again, the police investigators do not have the DOD and DIS resources. I also know of at least one person who managed to lie through the polygraph (for the FBI no less). They got ‘revealed’ when the investigator decided to do just one more check, maybe because this one was more thorough, or because of ‘gut’ instinct.NOTE: True sociopaths can lie through a poly. This is actually a known fact. Lie detectors don’t detect lies, but they detect the hidden guilt in lying and concealing as well as the fear in potentially getting caught.
Sociopaths->no soul, ends(results) justify the means and the only justifiable ends are the results they want.
November 9, 2013 at 11:45 PM #767734ParticipantRight, you don’t state it, and then hope that they don’t find out. Good luck with that.
While I’m sure a few people might have gotten away with that (and only assuming they were fairly minor issues), I’m willing to bet it is a very small minority.
I understand what sociopaths are, and acknowledge that some sociopaths have probably managed to get into the police force (and other LE positions at all govt levels), but these agencies most definitely do everything they can to weed them out.
FWIW, I think that some recruits might start with borderline personality/psychological issues, but the work can change them into full-blown problems. That is probably very likely, IMO.
If you doubt that they have some of the most thorough and invasive screening procedures (especially relative to the private sector), what else do you think they can/should do, given their resources? How would you make the screening more thorough? I’m genuinely interested in hearing your ideas.
November 9, 2013 at 11:49 PM #767732ParticipantWrong. You’re still not getting it. Try looking at what the recruits have to go through…even try to see if you can qualify yourself, just for the heck of it.
As for the physical portion, that is just one part of the process. The psychological/IQ test is a big part of it, as is the background check. And then there is the oral interview where you have to sell yourself (this is the only portion of the test that has something in common with most private sector jobs), and where the hiring committee/HR makes further notes about the candidate’s mannerisms, aptitude, background, and emotional/psychological state.
Yes, there is an IQ/psychological exam for many of these pubic sector jobs. I know it doesn’t fit into your (extremely uninformed) conceptions about public service, but most public agencies only higher people with above-average IQs (but not so high that it might indicate the potential for “unusual” behavioral or thought patterns).
November 9, 2013 at 11:54 PM #767735Participant[quote=CA renter]Right, you don’t state it, and then hope that they don’t find out. Good luck with that.
While I’m sure a few people might have gotten away with that (and only assuming they were fairly minor issues), I’m willing to bet it is a very small minority.[/quote]It is a bet you would probably lose. While there are many good cops, there are too many with chips on their shoulder, and problems in their lives. It is harder for them to reject candidates because they need them fairly badly.
[quote=CA renter]
I know what sociopaths are, and acknowledge that some sociopaths have probably managed to get into the police force (and other LE positions at all govt levels), but these agencies most definitely do everything they can to weed them out.[/quote]Yes and no. The nature of the sociopath is to conceal and ingrate themselves. It is only through sufficient cross-checking that you catch them.
[quote=CA renter]
FWIW, I think that some recruits might start with borderline personality/psychological issues, but the work can change them into full-blown problems. That is probably very likely, IMO.
[/quote]I don’t think it is the work, it is the access to authority and power over people, which is something that a sociopath craves. This also contributes to making it hard to weed them out. Would a sociopath rather go through a DOD/DIS/NSA screen to work behind a computer screen anonymously, or to go through a Police admission screen and then carry a gun in public and order people around? It also pulls in people who have authority complexes.
[quote=CA renter]
If you doubt that they have some of the most thorough and invasive screening procedures (especially relative to the private sector), what else do you think they can/should do, given their resources? How would you make the screening more thorough? I’m genuinely interested in hearing your ideas.[/quote]Might be useful to try to combine the search resources instead of using separate agencies. This might run across some privacy issues for police, but handle it like it was a Federal DOD issue instead of a state. If you want the job, must go through this screen.As for personality, it is hard to find the socios until they reveal their hands.
November 10, 2013 at 12:10 AM #767736ParticipantI cannot speak for all — or most — public agencies, but when I applied for a job in the public sector (not law enforcement), they screened using a federal database, IIRC. I believe they did this with my DH as well. This was fingerprinting and basic criminal/background check. Not sure if that’s what you’re talking about. Anything specific that you can elaborate on?
FWIW, I once had to get a federal security clearance about 20+ years ago, and this was much easier to do than to apply for/get screened by the LAPD.
November 10, 2013 at 12:23 AM #767737Participant[quote=CA renter]Wrong. You’re still not getting it. Try looking at what the recruits have to go through…even try to see if you can qualify yourself, just for the heck of it.
As for the physical portion, that is just one part of the process. The psychological/IQ test is a big part of it, as is the background check. And then there is the oral interview where you have to sell yourself (this is the only portion of the test that has something in common with most private sector jobs), and where the hiring committee/HR makes further notes about the candidate’s mannerisms, aptitude, background, and emotional/psychological state.
Yes, there is an IQ/psychological exam for many of these pubic sector jobs. I know it doesn’t fit into your (extremely uninformed) conceptions about public service, but most public agencies only higher people with above-average IQs (but not so high that it might indicate the potential for “unusual” behavioral or thought patterns).[/quote]
Yawn… Same ol’ boring argument…
“We are so elite… You couldn’t do this…”
We already had this fight. It’s the same argument that people use when they are trying to convince you that “services” are worth more… Hear the same shit from my vendors too…
I just don’t buy it…
CE
November 10, 2013 at 12:44 AM #767739Participant[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=CA renter]Wrong. You’re still not getting it. Try looking at what the recruits have to go through…even try to see if you can qualify yourself, just for the heck of it.
As for the physical portion, that is just one part of the process. The psychological/IQ test is a big part of it, as is the background check. And then there is the oral interview where you have to sell yourself (this is the only portion of the test that has something in common with most private sector jobs), and where the hiring committee/HR makes further notes about the candidate’s mannerisms, aptitude, background, and emotional/psychological state.
Yes, there is an IQ/psychological exam for many of these pubic sector jobs. I know it doesn’t fit into your (extremely uninformed) conceptions about public service, but most public agencies only higher people with above-average IQs (but not so high that it might indicate the potential for “unusual” behavioral or thought patterns).[/quote]
Yawn… Same ol’ boring argument…
“We are so elite… You couldn’t do this…”
We already had this fight. It’s the same argument that people use when they are trying to convince you that “services” are worth more… Hear the same shit from my vendors too…
I just don’t buy it…
CE[/quote]
Tell you what, CE. If you apply and get accepted into one of the major police departments in Southern California within 12 months, I’ll pay you $500. I’m putting my money where my mouth is…how about you?
Just to note that I’m not saying anything negative about you. I’m quite sure that you’re intelligent and hard-working. I just want you to experience it and gain more knowledge about it before you challenge it. If I don’t know much about something, I keep my mouth shut or I learn more about it before debating people who clearly know more than I do (note how I almost never comment on any tech/car/Carmel Valley/etc. threads…I read them all, but have very little knowledge compared to most other posters, so I lurk and learn). This is just an opportunity for you to gain first-hand knowledge of the process. I think you’ll have a much better understanding and respect for the people who do these jobs if you learn more about them.
November 10, 2013 at 12:47 AM #767742an
Participant[quote=CA renter]Tell you what, CE. If you apply and get accepted into one of the major police departments in Southern California within 12 months, I’ll pay you $500. I’m putting my money where my mouth is…how about you?[/quote]Who in their right mind would do that? Change your career for a $500 bet. Really?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.