- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by dimas
- Feb 25, 2005, 04:00 PMQuote from: coxion on Feb 25, 2005, 01:55 AMDimas,
Your probably more than right, I know I screwed myself over on that one. But I still hear about people being DQ'd for having been a habitual smoker.
If you mean habitual marijuana smoker, well that is simply a statement of a person's continued intent to disregard laws and break them. People can indeed change, but as a department and a supervisor am I willing to bet my job on their having changed for the better? Heck NO! A lawsuit resulting from a bad cop can range from a minimum of 60,000 dolllars to a million dollar loss for the city, county or state department. This money has to come from somewhere and that usually means cuts in equipment, staffing and all the necessary items to run an efficient department.
Now if you mean a habitual smoker of tobacco, this is a recent thing I have seen come up in several departments where they will not take a candidate if he is a smoker. I believe I have seen this more in Fire than LE departments. I really have no idea what the pushing factor behind this is except for long term health concerns.
Posted by BlackJhack
- Feb 25, 2005, 02:58 PMCoxion, as dimas stated, each department has it's own set of policies. As far as I understand, some departments (LAPD, LASO) have a certain "cut off", to which they will disqualify, depending on the amount of times you have smoked marijuana. No department that I know of will release the number of times the "cut off" is, but if you go over their set number, you are DQ'd.
More departments are "forgiving" on the "experimentation" of marijuana and some other drugs, but if you show a pattern of habitual use, the department(s) may see this as a potential problem, and we all know that all departments are trying to avoid any problems with employees, because mistakes are very costly to the city and the department.
Again, I have to agree with dimas. Some departments are more forgiving of certain "sins". Don't give up, do some research, figure out if there is another department you would like to work for, call a recruiter, explain your situation and go for it. All they can do is say "No".
More departments are "forgiving" on the "experimentation" of marijuana and some other drugs, but if you show a pattern of habitual use, the department(s) may see this as a potential problem, and we all know that all departments are trying to avoid any problems with employees, because mistakes are very costly to the city and the department.
Again, I have to agree with dimas. Some departments are more forgiving of certain "sins". Don't give up, do some research, figure out if there is another department you would like to work for, call a recruiter, explain your situation and go for it. All they can do is say "No".
Posted by coxion
- Feb 25, 2005, 01:55 AMDimas,
Your probably more than right, I know I screwed myself over on that one. But I still hear about people being DQ'd for having been a habitual smoker.
Your probably more than right, I know I screwed myself over on that one. But I still hear about people being DQ'd for having been a habitual smoker.
Posted by dimas
- Feb 24, 2005, 11:43 PMWell for one, each department has its own standards as to how much of a drug one could have used and specifically how long ago this was. To be honest I don't think it was your marijuana smoking that got you DQ'd, but the mushroom use since they are a hallucinogen.
IF a particualr department DQ's you then look for one that will accept your drug usage and apply there.
IF a particualr department DQ's you then look for one that will accept your drug usage and apply there.
Posted by coxion
- Feb 24, 2005, 11:36 PMWhile I agree that anyone that continually uses marijuana past their teens should not be allowed to be an LE officer. But on the other hand I don't think that haveing done marijuana in high school should be disqualifying. While I know it won't always DQ you, if you did it habitually or even just frequently for a period of time it more than likely will get you DQ'd. I say this because kids in highschool drink and smoke tobacco while being under the age habitually, thus making it an illegal act. So my question would be why is smoking marijuana so much worse.
I am against the use of drugs, but I too was young and dumb and did my fair share of marijuana as well as tried mushrooms once. I was DQ'd from my local police department, but anyone that drank or smoked tobacco under the age is not. This I personally don't understand.
I am against the use of drugs, but I too was young and dumb and did my fair share of marijuana as well as tried mushrooms once. I was DQ'd from my local police department, but anyone that drank or smoked tobacco under the age is not. This I personally don't understand.
Posted by BlackJhack
- Feb 24, 2005, 09:50 PMWell, sapper, I just met you, but you purchase, possess, and use an illegal substance. Those are 3 basic laws that you don't uphold. If you have ever shared your drugs with a friend you are now guilty of distribution. I am glad that you are here speaking of "moral boundaries", seeing as how you are here to talk about lying to the agency you are going to test for. How can you talk about "moral boundaries" and then ask if you should lie all in the same breath? It doesn't sound like you have a whole lot of boundaries, and since you don't, I don't believe that you are cut out to be a cop.
You also say that you are over-qualified to be security, well, you are obviously not qualified to work in LE, because if you went in and told the truth they would not hire you. I think you should re-evaluate what it is that you are trying to accomplish. I know that if I had a partner that had lied to get into the same department that I had worked my ass off to get into , I would trust him about as far as I could throw him.
I hear Wal-mart security is looking for a few brave soldiers, son......
You also say that you are over-qualified to be security, well, you are obviously not qualified to work in LE, because if you went in and told the truth they would not hire you. I think you should re-evaluate what it is that you are trying to accomplish. I know that if I had a partner that had lied to get into the same department that I had worked my ass off to get into , I would trust him about as far as I could throw him.
I hear Wal-mart security is looking for a few brave soldiers, son......
Posted by dimas
- Feb 24, 2005, 02:29 AMQuote from: sapper420 on Feb 23, 2005, 08:54 PM
So tell me dear BlackJhack, what other laws do I disagree with? Lol, Bob Marley huh? That's funny. But isn't he dead? And aside from that I think I'm a little over qualified to be a security gaurd but thanks for the chuckle. So let's go gents, either help me out by giving me tips or try and talk me out of it. But the one thing I can assure you of is this, when the proverbial shit hits the fan any officer would love to have me as his partner.
While we could argue the marijuana vs alcohol issue all day, the fact of the matter is that you continue to break the law by purchasing marijuana. It is that simple, you are a liability and the fact that you don't recognize this fact is most bothersome.
How exactly are you going to effect an arrest on a drug dealer who in the past has actually sold you drugs? Now that is hypocritical! Worst yet it can compromise your integrity and ability to properly do your job.
Face it, you are not cut out to be in Law Enforcement, the simple fact that you can somehow delude yourself into thinking that it is "ok" for you to smoke marijuana and continue to break the law explains this.
For the record, past use of even current use of alcohol is accepted by law enforcement agencies because it is currently LEGAL. But don't for a moment think that we accept alcoholics. Most agencies actually conduct a breathalizer the day of the drug screen. (anyone dumb enough to get plastered the day of or before their medical, is more than likely dumb enough to get plastered before their shift begins). If the background reveals that the candidate has a problem with drinking then he is NOT going to get hired.
Posted by sapper420
- Feb 23, 2005, 08:54 PMQuote from: BlackJhack on Feb 23, 2005, 06:32 PMI don't think you are ready to be in LE, because you disagree with some of our most basic laws, and you don't even understand why.
Maybe instead of trying to get a job in LE you can apply to be security at Bob Marley concerts, I'm sure they would be more than happy to have you.
So tell me dear BlackJhack, what other laws do I disagree with? Lol, Bob Marley huh? That's funny. But isn't he dead? And aside from that I think I'm a little over qualified to be a security gaurd but thanks for the chuckle. So let's go gents, either help me out by giving me tips or try and talk me out of it. But the one thing I can assure you of is this, when the proverbial shit hits the fan any officer would love to have me as his partner.
Posted by BlackJhack
- Feb 23, 2005, 06:32 PMIt isn't because you smoke weed that you are unfit to be an LE officer, it is because you break the law. Why do you think they have such an extensive process to become an LE officer? They want people that are trustworthy and honest, people that they feel are mature and will uphold all laws, no matter how minor the general public may think they are. That is what seperates you from an LE officer. I admit that bad cops always slip through the process, but LE agencies try to combat that with thorough backgrounds, psychs, etc. I don't think you are ready to be in LE, because you disagree with some of our most basic laws, and you don't even understand why.
Maybe instead of trying to get a job in LE you can apply to be security at Bob Marley concerts, I'm sure they would be more than happy to have you.
Maybe instead of trying to get a job in LE you can apply to be security at Bob Marley concerts, I'm sure they would be more than happy to have you.
Posted by sapper420
- Feb 23, 2005, 01:22 PMHmmm... so because I smoke weed you all think I'm unfit for LE duty? That's odd how society can define moral boundaries even when common sence would lead us in a different direction. And who in society has such a problem with marijuana that they would stigmatize an individual for his recreational use of marijuana? It just never ceases to amaze me how many people endanger themselfs and other with alcohol and society just smiles and says, "Ohh, he was just drunk." Personally, I would ten times over rather have a stoner riding shotgun than an alchy. And if the local PD dosen't want me then I can always go back to shooting bad guys overseas like I use to. And anxiety, as for your question on the UA, I can pass that no problem. In the physical condition that I am in if I stop for a week and run a few miles a day I'll be good as new mate. Now, while I may not agree with anxiety and 40 I do aprreciate their responce and postition. However, I will still apply to the local PD. I prefer to be judged on past perfomance and expected potential not on personal choices. Discriminating against marijuana users to me is hypocritical. But that's just my opinion. Lol, and now it's time for all the rebutals. This could be fun...
Posted by 40smith
- Feb 23, 2005, 12:44 PMI am going to have to agree with Anxietyguy.
No way.
Throw in the towel.
No way.
Throw in the towel.
Posted by anxietyguy
- Feb 23, 2005, 11:44 AMYou don't belong in LE if you are still smoking weed. Sorry but in our culture "weed" is taboo. Yes you can make the argument that alcohol is more dangerous, fact is that marijuana is illegal and you must respect that in LE even if you disagree with it. Even if you do pass the poly, how you going to pass the urine test?
Posted by sapper420
- Feb 23, 2005, 04:00 AMI smoke weed. Why? Because it dosen't turn me into an ass like beer does. So am I SOL? Can I pass my poly or should I throw in the towel? Kinda erks me that alcoholics can get in but I have to lie. But anywho... Tips, tricks, and smart ass remarks are all welcome.