View Full Version : Marijuana Question
I have been applying for departments for awhile now, and this recent application that I am filling out is the first one that has asked me if I have ever used marijuana before. The only choices are yes and no and no room for explanation or when was the last time i did it. But i can assure that it has been awhile since the last time i did more than 2 years or even 3 years.
my question is what should i mark on the application? I don't want this to come back and bite me in the you know what.
PonchIUP
10-22-2003, 21:40
If you have smoked Marijuana then the answer would be "yes". If you haven't smoked Marijuana then the answer will be "no". They will give you the opportunity to explain in full once your BG is done. I'm sure there are questions such as selling MJ as well and other questions about drug use. I wouldn't sweat it too bad, I know for my department that same question is on the initial application. Just answer the question honestly and wait to hear something. Good luck!
CaliYanksFan
10-23-2003, 14:08
Keep in mind ...if you lie ..and get caught ...you will get DQ'ed ....Then if you apply with another agency, they will share that info with your new department.
Just tell the truth ...tell them you were young and stupid and that you don't do it anymore.
Canimakeit
10-27-2003, 00:21
departments turn him down for a while to see if he sticks to being clean?
Im not a person that would know, but im curious if what I believe to be how they do things is correct.
Im a former MJ user and if I were in control of how things were done I would turn them down once or twice to see how well they pick thereself back up, im sure I will get the same treatment.
Thanks.
Mo Trooper
10-27-2003, 07:05
Mark yes, and explain it. It's sad, but probably more than half of new hires in this country have smoked pot. It's not that big of a deal anymore. You'll just have to explain it during the poly and background.
Originally posted by Canimakeit
(Wouldn't some) departments turn him down for a while to see if he sticks to being clean?. . . Nay, they're not in the rehab business, they would just move on to the next app until they find one that fits their criteria.
Canimakeit
10-27-2003, 14:21
good point.
Being honest seems to be the best way to go, but it is also a way to get you DQ'd.
If the Dept says you cannot have use in the last 10 years, you are done. Honesty will not get you brownie points, I tried that already. They will try and make you think it is better to be honest, as if they will give you props for that, then turn around and DQ you for it.
If they have no guidelines for how often you used it or how long ago then I would take my chances and be honest. But if they have ineligibility standards about it being honest is not going to get you the job. I am not saying you should lie, I am just warning you. I tried the honesty route that I used pot more than 10 times during high school which was in the 1980's, they showed me the door! So just debating what some other's said here, honesty may get you respect from them, but it also can get you DQ'd. Take that how you want.
Also I see someone said Dept's share info with each other during background checks, is this true and common practice even if you don't tell them you applied with the other dept?
My advice is be honest. If you lie here and get caught, you're in bad shape. That would tend to send them a message about what else you may lie about. Dishonesty is a big no no.
Second, if you smoked MJ, and you had friends that did the same thing, are you still hanging around them?
I'll be the first to say that the people you hang around with be examples of what kind of person you are. They'll have their influence for sure.
Hoot. You're considering lying on your application? I believe at the bottom of many applications you sign under penalty of perjury that the information is true. Perjury is a felony. So you've told us (possibly) you're willing to commit a felony in order to get hired?
You may need to re-consider your career choice. If not then use this chewing out as a wake up call. Telling the truth is not optional in this business and should not be an option for you.
Besides, answering no to that kind of question these days makes some background investigators dig harder :p
Totally true. I was never a pot-smoker and Background Investigators always dig into me hard, trying to see if I'll change my story. It's frustrating. They think I'm full of crap when I say "no prior drug use" on my applications.
Like I said, I am not promoting that he lies, just don't want him to go in there with all that honesty expecting a pat on the back. Been there, done that, was shown the door promptly after. The only time I ever regretted telling the truth, other than when I told a girl once "yes those pants make you look fat".
Really though, it is sad honesty does not count more as a virtue agencies look for. For example, why would dismiss a 30 year old applicant for being up front and honest that they tried cocaine once when they were 16 years old and never touched it again? You are inviting people to lie with such standards! I often wonder how many LEO's are out on the street right now that are imperfect but got pass the polygraph with their past. At least with the guy admitting his faults at age 16 you know what you are getting.
Jeff Rambo
10-30-2003, 17:56
Originally posted by LEBound
I often wonder how many LEO's are out on the street right now that are imperfect but got pass the polygraph with their past. At least with the guy admitting his faults at age 16 you know what you are getting.
Well, I'll be your huckleberry.
How many of you currently on the job or previously on the job admitted to past drug use during the hiring process? How many years prior to being hired was it when you used? What did you use? How many times? What departments?
On the flip side, how many of you admitted to it and were shown the door? How many years prior to being in the hiring process was it when you used? What did you use and how many times? What departments?
Same questions for those currently in the hiring process.
I will answer on question #3. Smoked MJ twice almost 3yrs ago. Took and passed both my written (May) and physical abilities test (July) earlier this year. Waiting for interviews now. This is with 3 Los Angeles City departments.
CanineCop
10-31-2003, 12:52
Woh! now we're getting personal. MJ 4-5 times and cocain twice all as a teen in high school. Been hired by some agencies and shown the door by others, sometimes with regret and sometimes with a swift kick. Always told the truth, it's terrible to live looking over your shoulder. Spent 4 years in corrections rebuilding my background after a sabatical from LE that included an addict ex-wife that ran me into bankruptcy. That's as detailed as I want to get on an open forum. I still regret past mistakes but you can suck it up and overcome if you're strong enough. You DO have to get used to rejection and horror story BIs.
Good Luck
Canimakeit
10-31-2003, 13:07
and you got hired? your a cop?
I only have MJ history, no other drugs.
If your story is true, wich I have no reason not to believe it, you sure gave me hope.
donnie999
11-01-2003, 00:27
Can someone answer this. Why does this police department want only drug free police officers? Isnt that a welcome mat for lies/liars?
Totally different situations in Chicago (see my post"serious integrity issues") I know people that have lied and now are officers. I prefer to answer honestly and let the chips fall where they may.
I don't think I should have posted this but this department is unreal for their requirements. I have officers telling me if I want to get on to lie. They should step into 2003 kids are going to try things.
Don
CanineCop
11-01-2003, 01:41
I'm afraid maybe this discussion of drugs and LE could get out of hand. Someone asked "who's done drugs and gotten hired or not?", I'll step up and say that I've done some, not proud of it but I did it. AND I got hired by more than one agency. I also have had more DQs and better qualified applicant letters than I can count. There are plenty of fine agencies out there for which I don't qualify or if not outright DQed I'll never get hired. I worked through my past mistakes and by the grace of god, got a job with a fine agency that I like very much.
Now, no agency owes you a job. Each agency is free to set their own standards. Some care about drug use, some about driving record, etc... There are plenty of applicants who haven't done any type of controled substance, haven't broken the traffic laws (much), etc... If your dream job doesn't want you knock on some other doors, cuz trust me, they aren't losing any sleep over it.
Don't wish that the job you want had different standards, find a job that will accept your past for what it is. Be persistent.
These are my thoughts, and I'm not sure I expressed my self clearly but I'm too tired to worry about it now.
Good night, John
Originally posted by donnie999
Can someone answer this. Why does this police department want only drug free police officers? Isnt that a welcome mat for lies/liars?
Totally different situations in Chicago (see my post"serious integrity issues") I know people that have lied and now are officers. I prefer to answer honestly and let the chips fall where they may.
I don't think I should have posted this but this department is unreal for their requirements. I have officers telling me if I want to get on to lie. They should step into 2003 kids are going to try things.
Don
That was kind of my thinking.
My problem with the whole thing is they look at one situation rather than the whole applicant.
For example. A 30 year old with regular pot use at age 16-17 (more than 10 times in a lifetime) in high school. Let's say this person joined the military after school, got out, went to college, let's say he was a firefighter for 4 years and now decided he wants to be in LE. Many dept's that have a limit for pot use in a lifetime will not even give this guy the time of day. And why? Because of using poor judgement as a teenager! A teenager with poor judgement, imagine that!
Of course lines should be drawn, but would you rather have the person mentioned above, or have someone who has done worse and just lied about it to get hired? People make mistakes, that is to be human. I would be very skeptical of any person that claims they have lived a perfect life. Those are the ones that you hear about stealing drugs from the evidence room.
Moved this thread into Drugs and LE, since the discussion might benefit from cruising other threads on this subject. There are lots of factors in the hiring rules, but there is also a business operation. Application for a job, including an LE job is not a process of individual absolution and understanding. It is a process of culling a large number of applications to get to smaller number for selection. For an agency to relax its rules more would require that there be no applicants who met its standards as posted who could perform in an exemplary fashion. As has been posted here, agencies have some negative experience with relaxing too much so they may also broaden their search.
Statement that young people will try things is absolutely true. But not all young people and some not so much. If every 16 year old used marijuana 15 or more times might be a different story. Fact is that even if everyone you know used it every day for two years, that does not encompass even a particle of a percent of the population of 16 year olds.
Are there also legal and moral issues here, you bet and they are discussed alot in the threads that now surround this one.
As for lying to get the job, that is a big no no for folks who deprive people of life and liberty by giving information under oath. Job descriptions for people who feel they can do so much good that they can lie and doctor their resume is either Division IA coach or politician.
Being dq'ed is tough, but it also is not a judgement on your particular virtue, it is just a decision that we have enough good applicants who come over the bar of the standards. If that also signals that you are accountable for your actions even in the teen years, then that is a signal that LE ought to send anyway.
Lastly, the comment about trying things in 2003 tickled me. I understand the intent of the comment and respect it, but as a flower power generation guy I have to wonder if the young folks also feel they can get a patent on sex and rock and roll.
Originally posted by ATF SAC
Moved this thread into Drugs and LE, since the discussion might benefit from cruising other threads on this subject. There are lots of factors in the hiring rules, but there is also a business operation. Application for a job, including an LE job is not a process of individual absolution and understanding. It is a process of culling a large number of applications to get to smaller number for selection. For an agency to relax its rules more would require that there be no applicants who met its standards as posted who could perform in an exemplary fashion. As has been posted here, agencies have some negative experience with relaxing too much so they may also broaden their search.
Statement that young people will try things is absolutely true. But not all young people and some not so much. If every 16 year old used marijuana 15 or more times might be a different story. Fact is that even if everyone you know used it every day for two years, that does not encompass even a particle of a percent of the population of 16 year olds.
Are there also legal and moral issues here, you bet and they are discussed alot in the threads that now surround this one.
As for lying to get the job, that is a big no no for folks who deprive people of life and liberty by giving information under oath. Job descriptions for people who feel they can do so much good that they can lie and doctor their resume is either Division IA coach or politician.
Being dq'ed is tough, but it also is not a judgement on your particular virtue, it is just a decision that we have enough good applicants who come over the bar of the standards. If that also signals that you are accountable for your actions even in the teen years, then that is a signal that LE ought to send anyway.
Lastly, the comment about trying things in 2003 tickled me. I understand the intent of the comment and respect it, but as a flower power generation guy I have to wonder if the young folks also feel they can get a patent on sex and rock and roll.
Wow, well said.
UncleSugar
11-01-2003, 17:25
Originally posted by LEBound
Really though, it is sad honesty does not count more as a virtue agencies look for. For example, why would dismiss a 30 year old applicant for being up front and honest that they tried cocaine once when they were 16 years old and never touched it again? You are inviting people to lie with such standards! I often wonder how many LEO's are out on the street right now that are imperfect but got pass the polygraph with their past. At least with the guy admitting his faults at age 16 you know what you are getting.
Well as someone who never tried drugs, I think I'm on safe ground when I say this: Honesty is a virtue they are looking for, but being responsible for your actions is also something they seek. Taking drugs when you knew it was wrong shows a lack of responsibility and self discipline.
Inviting people to lie with these standards? That's just making excuses. You may have been invited to try drugs, by the folks you got it from, but the agencies you're applying to aren't inviting you to lie they are inviting you to tell the truth and hope you meet their criteria.
You make choices in life, good and bad. There are consequences for those choices, good and bad.
The good consequence of my choice not to try any illegal drugs is that I don't have to worry about meeting the criteria for any agency. The bad consequence is the guys doing my BI spend extra time on me because they assume someone my age must have tried drugs at least once, which slows down my BI.
You took drugs and have the bad consequence of not meeting hiring criteria for some agencies. The good consequence is this can be a learning experience, however painful, that your choices have lasting affects and therefore you should make those choices carefully.
Finally, the, "I was only 16," or whatever age you choose, argument doesn't work for me. Should we apply that argument to dealing drugs also? How about assaults or homicide? The 5 year / 10 times rule seems to allow a great deal of leniency on the MJ issue. 10 years on the other drugs is also very lenient.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.