Utah banned a man from job because he lives 3 minutes away from Utah border

Don’t know how common it is for cities, but New Orleans has a recidency requirement for police officers. Its been a fight for decades, with officers routinely faking addresses to live in the burbs without losing their job. On the one hand it makes hiring and keeping officers harder, but on the other it does reduce the us vs them that comes with people being policed only by people that don’t live there.

I doubt rural Utah and Idaho have any similar us vs. them dichotomy but this law might have arisen from similar reasons


Welcome to BoingBoing! Great first post. Very informative.


That headline is very poorly designed. From just reading that, I had the impression that the guy lived in Utah, and it was his proximity to the border that prevented him from being licensed.

Reading the article, its finally revealed that “3 minutes” has absolutely nothing to do with his qualifications, he would be just as outta luck if he lived on the other side of the state.

Obviously, the author thinks that the state of Utah should fudge its own rules based on geography. That might be the case… but its a case you’d need to build in the body of the article, not an assumption you get to bury in the lede.




I know this is probably the completely wrong reaction, but running polygraph tests seems like it would be a fun side hustle. Don’t get me wrong, I think they are mostly bullshit.

CLIENT: Is your polygraph test accurate?

ME: I don’t know, but I’ll do it for $40 after you sign a waiver that says “for entertainment purposes only”

1 Like

Yeah apparently most polygraph tests these days are run on a laptop using a fairly cheap USB setup. Particular software I’d assume costs more.

You could put together something made of pipe cleaners that would be about as reliable as the most expensive “professional” polygraph for this sort of thing.

There’s a reason they aren’t admissable in court.

1 Like

How? He’s not licensed!

I was licenced as a PI in British Columbia for several years, though I no longer hold such a licence. I do have a Provincial licence as a Security Consultant. Private Investigators are strictly regulated in most Canadian Provinces and American States.
If I wish to work as a PI or Security Consultant in any other Province, I have to abide by their licencing qualification requirements and obtain both a Security Business Licence plus have a PI or Security Consultant licence as appropriate for the work I’ll be performing. The standards are high, restrictions are clearly spelled out and the penalties for any breach of confidentiality, privacy or ethics are severe.
It’s the same in most States.


Did it say in the video that he lives 18 miles away from Utah?
How does he make it there in three minutes?

Maybe he commutes by rocket car?

Are they legally required to do that, or are they just nice people?

Since you have so much information about PIs, I’m sure you have some figures at hand which I was unable to research: can you tell me how many PIs there are in the US, and what percentage of them are ex cops?

Wow. Yup, that kind of get to the core of it, doesn’t it.

Your thoughtful answer has made me examine some preconceived notions about licenses. But I still have a couple thoughts about it. Mostly I don’t like large corporations and/or wealthy individuals profiting off of selling licenses (which, I feel is a pretty non Koch position).

Licenses often do not benefit the holder or entitle them to any union-type membership benefits. Hair stylists have to pay a yearly fee to the state board and often operate as independent contractors with no collective representation built into the license. This despite very minimal public health risks that could be used to justify forcing fees. How much do we want to bet that the board is stocked with people from a large corp that sells the required school?

I’ve witnessed and even helped professionally a private org create an industry certification that even small businesses and individuals are encouraged to adopt. Membership includes some very large corps (think Nike). They would love to be legislated into law for the permanent revenue stream of selling education units. Deep down, the policies are those benefiting large corporations at the top - like a union of shitty corporations - not the interests of individual members. I feel like this is probably less of an exception and more of a rule when it comes to private licensing boards that have lobbyist that push for states to legalize requirements.

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.