"Blind obedience" is the wrong word - no good police officer is blindly obedient.

Good police officers have to be able to make rapid judgment calls. There are times, however, when there is simply no time to think about a response. You have to rely on your training in those instances. That's why you see police videos where an officer has been shot, often seriously or even fatally, yet he or she returns fire. The officer didn't think about it - it was simply the trained response kicking in.

Racist people usually do that.

Is there evidence that the higher the IQ the worse the instincts?

I don't think someone with a high IQ will stop to think about the situation when a gun is being pulled on them. It seems to me that it doesn't really have much to do with intelligence as just knowing what to do before such a situation occurs.

To me, it would seem that a higher intelligence is favorable in tough situations like that. But anyway, I can hardly see how stupidity is favorable in any situation. Unless of course you want blind obedient cops that are willing to do morally (and legally) questionable things just because authority requires them to do so.

But in the end, if I were a criminal, I would be happy about a stupid police force.

A high IQ and practical intelligence are not necessarily synonymous. A lot of book smart folks are not street smart.

I never said that police officers should be stupid. I'm a state police detective, and I went to an excellent college and graduated with honors. I also saw a lot of super-intelligent students who lacked common sense and who clearly would not be qualified to work as cops (or in any other real-life job).

Also, bear in mind that in most police forces, 10 to 20 % of the cops make 90% of the arrests. When the do nothings start trying to do something, it usually causes more problems.

I should say I agree with you. There is obviously a difference between intelligence and wisdom. But I fail to see how any of this justifies discrimination against higher IQ's. Even if intelligence were completely irrelevant, which I don't believe, then all this would establish is that applicants be viewed on an equal basis regardless of their score on an IQ test. Not justification for a barring of candidates due to high IQ scores.

Even though I agree with what you said, I still think that in cases of equally qualified candidates, the candidate with the higher IQ should be favored, not the other way around. Even given what you said, it's still conceivable that a higher IQ should be favorable in all circumstances; unless of course you want dumb obedient cops.

Much of this conversation assumes that an IQ test can accurately relate a person's "intelligence" to some numerical expression.

I'm sorry, but I don't put much faith in a person's IQ since I think human beings are far more complicated to have their "intelligence" boiled down to some statistically-derived number that is calculated from the answers given on a test.