Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color are the stars on the U.S. flag?:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by policeHopeful
 - Sep 26, 2007, 03:40 PM
thanks George and sarge for giving me a fair shake.
Posted by Sergeant1107
 - Sep 25, 2007, 02:57 AM
Quote from: Paradiddle on Sep 24, 2007, 10:49 AMOK Serge, what if the cohort was 17? 18? 20? ----where do you draw the distinction between natural male adolescent mischief and deviant behavior?  What if the dog were a horse? ----or worse yet, what if the dog were a 5 year old girl, and the applicant were just trying a shocking distraction (which is very common.) What if the 15 yr old boy penally penetrated the animal----is that just silliness, or narcissistic paraphilia behavior?

In war, people come to the defense of percieved victims in order to increase their forces----often times at the peril of credibility. In other words, you defend someone who you haven't the foggiest idea what sort of individual you defend. When it comes to sex addicts, sexual fixations, and the sexually violent, no background check or conversations with old schoolmates will do. Your hatred for the polygraph seems to have blinded you to this fact. Polygraph, although both weak and strong, has strengths in areas where nothing else measures up. Much to the embarrassment of law enforcement officers everwhere, the same personality attributes that make for great officers is also unfortunately, the same psycho-dynamics as those of many rapists. Type A personality. You would do well to be extremely cautious in defending sexual activities that you may or may not have criminological expertise in. Dragon Lady is quite correct in her comments regarding profiles of sexual paraphilia indicators.

regards, Paradiddle
"What if" questions are often pointless and tangential.  I believe they are in this case.

The original poster said a dog licked his genitals once when he was fifteen.  That is pretty all we know about this person and his activities.  My response was reasonable.  I don't believe yours was.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Sep 24, 2007, 10:09 PM
Quote from: Paradiddle on Sep 24, 2007, 09:22 PMUh, yeah. "Maturity and wisdom" according to George Maschke.

I observed only that policeHopeful has displayed more wisdom and maturity than you and your fellow polygraphers who have posted in this thread. You set the bar quite low.
Posted by Paradiddle
 - Sep 24, 2007, 09:22 PM
Quote from: Paradiddle on Sep 24, 2007, 04:06 PM
Quote from: policeHopeful on Sep 24, 2007, 03:41 PM"what if the dog were a 5 year old girl, " Are you suggesting that I would want to molest children? You are a sick FUCK! I believe child molestors should be given the death penalty. You are so fucking clueless. I would agree with you about some of your post. I believe the polygraph is a wonderful way of keeping bad people from getting into lawenforcement. On the otherhand how is it fair? I mean people who are actually in real postions of power are not required to take a polygraph and in most cases is forbidden by law to require one. Members of the senate and congress are not subjected to these. Judges and even Supreme court judges do not take them. My god a person who is elected to the presidency of the united states is not subjected to them. It's not often that a police officer will come into contact with a child, but people who work with them everyday and allday such as teachers,doctors and daycare personnel are not even subjected to polygraphs. So paradiddle your arguement is unfair and your opinion holds no water.



Uh, yeah. "Maturity and wisdom" according to George Maschke.







Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Sep 24, 2007, 09:03 PM
policeHopeful,

I think you've displayed more wisdom and maturity than the various polygraphers who have condemned you here:
  • palerider, who posted disinformation about polygraph countermeasures -- a tacit admission that he has little confidence in the polygraph community's ability to detect them;

  • Dragon Lady, who implied that you are a "sex offender";

  • Paradiddle, who seems to have fallen down his own slippery slope of logic to lose all sense of proportion;

  • Wonder Woman, who is also "concerned" about you.
While applicants for positions of public trust have an ethical obligation to answer relevant questions truthfully, the polygraph suite is not a confessional, and applicants are under no obligation to reveal impertinent details of their lives about which they may be embarrassed or ashamed. As I mentioned earlier, the indiscretion you mentioned is the subject of a control question (not a relevant one) commonly asked by no less a law enforcement agency than the U.S. Secret Service. You would be wise to keep it to yourself.
Posted by Wonder_Woman
 - Sep 24, 2007, 06:58 PM
policeHopeful,  the concern I have about you is

first you participate in bestiality.

Second, you want to deceive the entity that may hire you.

Third, you go to an ANTI site to find information on polygraphs rather than calling up a polygraph examiner in in your area and asking the source OR calling up the LE agency you want to work for and asking them annonymously.

Fourth, you have an anger management issues.

If you keep writing we will start seeing more of you that you want to hide.  BTW, I am also a polygraph examiner....and will be looking for you. ;D
Posted by Paradiddle
 - Sep 24, 2007, 04:56 PM
I am a polygraph Examiner you numnut. I have extensive experience in testing people such as yourself, and I also have a good history with detecting countermeasures, especially on big flabby guys who can't read very well, and exaggerate their 1 hour martial arts course in Basic Training. If you have a question about polygraph, than maybe you should put your thinking cap on and listen to a real living, breathing, polygraph examiner. I wasn't threatening you tubby, I was threatening anyone (minor or adult) that if they were to victimize my dog, I would fold them like a  t-shirt. I am a polygraph examiner, on a web site that relates directly to polygraph----so you could say I am working a little (although it's a stretch.) You on the other hand are not working. You are trying to circumvent a test that will no doubt reflect many bad things you have done, least of which is your smokey story regarding victimizing man's best friend.


p.s. Shukran for serving the country, regardless of your intentions with your polygraph test.
Posted by policeHopeful
 - Sep 24, 2007, 04:33 PM
speechless,huh?
Posted by policeHopeful
 - Sep 24, 2007, 04:16 PM
paradiddle, what is your purpose for posting and visiting this site? No one comes here because they're bored. I assume that you have or will be taking a polygraph. If thats the case you come here to learn how to beat the polygraph, which is why the majority of us are here. Oh and you would break my back in Half?????? I hardly doubt that sir. I am 260 lbs of pure muscle, trained in various martial arts and a former combat soldier  who served 13 months in Iraq.
Posted by Paradiddle
 - Sep 24, 2007, 04:06 PM
Quote from: policeHopeful on Sep 24, 2007, 03:41 PM"what if the dog were a 5 year old girl, " Are you suggesting that I would want to molest children? You are a sick FUCK! I believe child molestors should be given the death penalty. You are so fucking clueless. I would agree with you about some of your post. I believe the polygraph is a wonderful way of keeping bad people from getting into lawenforcement. On the otherhand how is it fair? I mean people who are actually in real postions of power are not required to take a polygraph and in most cases is forbidden by law to require one. Members of the senate and congress are not subjected to these. Judges and even Supreme court judges do not take them. My god a person who is elected to the presidency of the united states is not subjected to them. It's not often that a police officer will come into contact with a child, but people who work with them everyday and allday such as teachers,doctors and daycare personnel are not even subjected to polygraphs. So paradiddle your arguement is unfair and your opinion holds no water.


I am a sick F? Why don't you tell the truth about what real sorts of things you did when you were "younger"----besides victimizing a defensless dog. If you did that to my dog, you'd decide to start licking your own genitals as I would break your back in half. The more you write, the more you remind me of a sex offender. Per your criminal-genic behavior, you are probably a sex addict in denial----that is a person who cannot pass up a sexual opportunity by will-power alone. Sex addicts usually will have a run in with the law as they typically either have sex with the wrong person, or animal or child----and usually do so when in a position of authority. When I was 15, I had a crush on my Spanish teacher, not my beagle.




Posted by policeHopeful
 - Sep 24, 2007, 03:41 PM
"what if the dog were a 5 year old girl, " Are you suggesting that I would want to molest children? You are a sick FUCK! I believe child molestors should be given the death penalty. You are so fucking clueless. I would agree with you about some of your post. I believe the polygraph is a wonderful way of keeping bad people from getting into lawenforcement. On the otherhand how is it fair? I mean people who are actually in real postions of power are not required to take a polygraph and in most cases is forbidden by law to require one. Members of the senate and congress are not subjected to these. Judges and even Supreme court judges do not take them. My god a person who is elected to the presidency of the united states is not subjected to them. It's not often that a police officer will come into contact with a child, but people who work with them everyday and allday such as teachers,doctors and daycare personnel are not even subjected to polygraphs. So paradiddle your arguement is unfair and your opinion holds no water.
Posted by Paradiddle
 - Sep 24, 2007, 10:49 AM
OK Serge, what if the cohort was 17? 18? 20? ----where do you draw the distinction between natural male adolescent mischief and deviant behavior?  What if the dog were a horse? ----or worse yet, what if the dog were a 5 year old girl, and the applicant were just trying a shocking distraction (which is very common.) What if the 15 yr old boy penally penetrated the animal----is that just silliness, or narcissistic paraphilia behavior?

In war, people come to the defense of percieved victims in order to increase their forces----often times at the peril of credibility. In other words, you defend someone who you haven't the foggiest idea what sort of individual you defend. When it comes to sex addicts, sexual fixations, and the sexually violent, no background check or conversations with old schoolmates will do. Your hatred for the polygraph seems to have blinded you to this fact. Polygraph, although both weak and strong, has strengths in areas where nothing else measures up. Much to the embarrassment of law enforcement officers everwhere, the same personality attributes that make for great officers is also unfortunately, the same psycho-dynamics as those of many rapists. Type A personality. You would do well to be extremely cautious in defending sexual activities that you may or may not have criminological expertise in. Dragon Lady is quite correct in her comments regarding profiles of sexual paraphilia indicators.

regards, Paradiddle
Posted by policeHopeful
 - Sep 22, 2007, 12:46 PM
Dragon_Lady, it saddens me that people like you would label me a 'sex offender'. I was a kid at the time. I am a decent person. I am for the most part, except for white lies. I have never stolen from an employer, as a matter of fact I have never even been intoxicated. With all of these thieves, weirdos, drug dealers, rapists and child molesters out there- I am the least of anybody's worries. I fought for this country. I gave 15 months of my life...I believe I deserve a fair shake.
Posted by Sergeant1107
 - Sep 21, 2007, 08:31 PM
Quote from: Dragon_Lady on Sep 21, 2007, 06:02 PMForgive me for assuming that Police Hopeful was a criminal.  However, he is a deviant.  Usually when you get a little bit of info (sexually related) it is just the tip of the iceberg.  Still, here he is trying to hide his deviant sexual past.  Next thing he will apply for the K9 unit.

So, George in your estimation, how many individuals do you believe this site has helped hide their deviant sexual behaviors?    Chime in on this one Sergeant, would you hire or want to work with someone like this?
It would not bother me at all to find out that any of the men or women I work with had, at the age of 15, permitted a dog to lick their genitals.

If that's the worst thing they've done in their lives it's hardly worth mentioning.

If they did it at age 25 I think it shows the possibility of some sort of problem.  At age 15 I believe it means nothing.
Posted by Dragon_Lady
 - Sep 21, 2007, 06:02 PM
Forgive me for assuming that Police Hopeful was a criminal.  However, he is a deviant.  Usually when you get a little bit of info (sexually related) it is just the tip of the iceberg.  Still, here he is trying to hide his deviant sexual past.  Next thing he will apply for the K9 unit.

So, George in your estimation, how many individuals do you believe this site has helped hide their deviant sexual behaviors?    Chime in on this one Sergeant, would you hire or want to work with someone like this?