Troll trap.
Posting history, folks:
https://www.expertlaw.com/forums/sea...archid=1929293
Troll trap.
Posting history, folks:
https://www.expertlaw.com/forums/sea...archid=1929293
Tax has a point about regional areas too; I'm in Massachusetts.
I live and work in politically correct CA where they do all things towards an eye towards perception and even we only have 13% female officers in CA and north of 25% minority officers. Having been part of a POST commission on hiring and retention, we here in CA do a LOT of targeted recruiting and even then, we come nowhere near the community demographics. Nationwide, demographics are why some of the recommendations from President Obama's Task Force on 21st Century Policing included eliminating or severely downgrading elements of the background investigation and hiring practices. To achieve parity we will have to ask ourselves if demographic balance is more important than quality?
I am sure there are still agencies and attitudes that exist from ages gone past. But, they are outside the mainstream. When a liberal state with progressive hiring standards like CA cannot reach parity, it's not some bigot or misogynist in the Chief's office making that call.
^Agreed. Not only is your initial line of thinking flawed (I too have never experienced a University with more female officers), but the fact that you jump so quickly to asking "are they generally just not as qualified as their male counterparts?" leads me to believe you're just looking to a reaffirm the bias you've developed based on your own very limited experience.
I had the aquaintance of a female county police detective. In her office was a plaque that read "I have PMS and a gun...Any questions?"