I recently took my polygraph for a law enforcement position.  I read and re-read the information throughout this website and figured I was prepared as I ever could possibly be.  I knew going in that I would have to lie about prior drug use as I would be disqualified automatically if I were to be truthful about my drug history.  As expected I went in nervous as hell, I imagine most people probably are.  I picked my spot on the wall that I would stare at for the entirety of my test, I bit the hell out of the side of my tongue for the control questions, I controlled my breathing as best as I could.  Still though, I could feel my heart racing at certain times and tried in desperation to control my reactions....not good....I failed, but I failed in a way I never would have imagined.  Although I did knowingly lie about drug use I was told I failed for 1) drug use 2) theft 3) criminal activity 4) domestic violence.  I was blown away by the last three failures and can't account as to how and why I would have failed them, especialy the criminal activity and domestic violence.  For an early twenty-something this was an eye-opening and nerve-racking experience that I would wish on no-one.  I wish each and every person who is polygraphed the best of luck but there is no guarantee you will pass....even if you tell the truth....I've found out first hand.

I do understand where you are coming from Kane but at the same time you must realize the situation as it presented itself.  Like many individuals in college I experimented with drug usage, mainly marijuana, but I had also tried ecstacy once, mushrooms once, and cocaine once.  The last three items are means for immediate disqualification for entry into almost every law enforcement organization.  While I do realize that the choices were willingly made by myself, I by no means am an active user of any of the above substances and experimented with them several years ago....which left me with only the option of having to lie in order to have the possibility become a LEO.   

darkcobra2005 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2005 at 11:47pm:



Cobra,

Do you mean that the polygraph worked in AC's case  through intimidation? AC says he only lied about drug use, but also failed on theft, criminal activity and domestic violence. That's only one out of four. How do you explain this?   

AC,

I have to agree with rcop on this one. It is a good thing that you were not hired as an officer. You have no business being in LE when it's obvious that you believe that the rules don't apply to you. You didn't meet the qualifications of the dept., but figured you'd just apply anyway and lie about your past drug use instead of  telling the truth. That quality with a badge is a dangerous combination.

This is the slippery slope argument, and it's a classical fallacy. Have you ever driven your car over the speed limit? Well, what other laws are you willing to break? It's easy to have contempt for degree, but it's also lazy. Plato teaches that certain lies are necessary, even noble. The good, in the last analysis, is higher in dignity than the true. You shouldn't be unjustly held back from your chosen career because you smoked pot more than 15 times when you were in high school, or because you experimented with LSD, if you are no longer a drug user (with the exception of alcohol because we all know that alcoholism is rampant in fire and law enforcement). A polygraph doesn't see into your soul, and it's not an interrogation that is designed to help you. In the absence of any proof of wrong doing, they should not be obsessing over things that happened in your past. Human beings are not static, they are dynamic, which means that in a very real sense, you are no longer the person you were yesterday, let alone 10 years ago. If you tell them what they want to hear to get the job, it doesn't mean you're a bad person. It means you don't think they were worthy of asking you the question in the first place. They don't hook you up to a polygraph machine because they are wise. 

kane wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2005 at 7:50pm:

Blind obedience to rules is not what makes a good law enforcement officer. To make good decisions, you sometimes have to choose the lesser of two evils. The world isn't binary and neither is police work.

polyfool wrote on Nov 4^th, 2005 at 4:51am:

So much for the expertise you received from this group huh?