I think I'm screwed (BI)

[chvylmna41]

I know there are a lot of posts on this topic, but any LEO from NJ that can answer this would be greatly appreciated.

I have a history of drug use. I have experimented with shrooms (2xs, last time spring 2003), ecstacy (2xs,ast time fall 2001), and MJ (off and on for 3 yrs, last time spring 2003). Am I pretty much screwed?

I have ceased all usage and will complete my undergrad degree in spring of 2005. I plan on going to grad school to complete an MPA (not just to distance myself from last usage, but because I am interested in furthering my education.

When you're young, you do stupid things, but I don't feel that my youthful indiscretions should necessarily DQ me from employment. I have definitely learned from my mistakes, and would never ever consider touching any substance ever again.

I know that agencies look for applicants with integrity, and I know that they view usage as a breach of integrity, but if I am willing to fess up to my misdeeds should/will I still be DQd?

[Nonsequitur]

You are looking ina very competitive area for Law Enforcement and your history of drug use will get you DQ'ed from all but the most liberal departments.

I personally would tell you that you should look for a career in some other field, because you are, as you put it, screwed.

The things that will be looked at will include but are not limited too, the reasons for the drug usage (illegal regardless), and how you pass or accept responsibility for these "mistakes". Also you make it sound like you used more than once and were somewhere along the lines of a "casual" user.

I am sorry but I think you should forget about law enforcement, especially after taking a hallucinogenic substance.

[FLdeputy]

My opinion: Your education will open many doors for you, however, law enforcement will never be one of them.

FLdeputy

[Time Traveller]

Originally posted by chvylmna41

I have a history of drug use. I have experimented with shrooms (2xs, last time spring 2003), ecstacy (2xs,ast time fall 2001), and MJ (off and on for 3 yrs, last time spring 2003). Am I pretty much screwed?


In a word "YES"

[chvylmna41]

should I give up all hope though? I have a great GPA and have completely turned my life around.

Are there any other options out there for a CJ major other than being a LEO. Anything that pays well I mean.

[J-Mann]

You could be a Criminal Justice professor with a good GPA and a doctorate from a good CJ university. You could also warn new CJ students about being DQed for drug use and speak with experience.


J-Mann

[Nonsequitur]

Originally posted by chvylmna41
should I give up all hope though? I have a great GPA and have completely turned my life around.

Are there any other options out there for a CJ major other than being a LEO. Anything that pays well I mean.

The drug usage pretty well destroys any chance of LEO work unless you find a department that will overlook it (although I doubt you would want to work for such a shady department anyway)... Regardless you may want to consider pre-Law and become a lawyer? (Although I am not sure even that is possible).

FLdeputy said it best above: "My opinion : Your education will open many doors for you, however, law enforcement will never be one of them."

[chvylmna41]

So I should just give up on becoming a LEO? What if I wait a couple years?

[LAPDguy]

Originally posted by chvylmna41
So I should just give up on becoming a LEO? What if I wait a couple years?
Your chances are slim to none. Even if you wait 5 or 10 years for a Background investigator that's still not that long enough in relative terms. I'd say anything that involves a thorough B.I. such as federal or local LE is out of your reach.

[will2335]

you are definatly screwed, maybe you can try being a security guard somewhere if you want something to do with law enforcement. How long have you wanted to be a cop? Why would you do those drugs if you were considering law enforcement. I don't want to knock security guards when i write this but I know they sometimes will hire anyone without a criminal record.

[CollegeBoy427]

So you have only been drug free for about a year? How long have you been wanting to be a police officer? If you have wanted to be a police officer for longer than a year, didnt you know that extacy and shrooms will dq you from the process? The idea of becoming a college criminolgy professor sounds like the best so far. Good luck to you.

zach

[Cascade]

Yeah, I cannot imagine any agency overlooking your drug usage, even years from now.

[chvylmna41]

Just wondering if anyone here is an actual authority on these issues as far as hiring is concerned. Not that I don't want to hear opinions, but hearing the truth is my main concern right now.

[Time Traveller]

Originally posted by chvylmna41
Just wondering if anyone here is an actual authority on these issues as far as hiring is concerned. Not that I don't want to hear opinions, but hearing the truth is my main concern right now.

I am an authority for my agency, you could NEVER be in the FBI. I feel very confident about stating that for my agency and any other Federal LEA.

[pikevt]

Originally posted by chvylmna41
Just wondering if anyone here is an actual authority on these issues as far as hiring is concerned. Not that I don't want to hear opinions, but hearing the truth is my main concern right now.

I understand that LE may be what you want to do, but the choices you made will most certainly DQ you from a LE career. I made choices in HS by getting mediocre grades which in turn prevented me from getting into the elite colleges that I wanted to get into. This was my own fault, I accepted it and moved on. Accept the mistakes YOU have made and understand that eventhough you may have not been arrested for the drug use, you will have to pay the consequences in a different way. Take advantage of your good education and run with it, there are other career paths to take....good luck.

[Sandles2Sidearm]

In short, if you still want to work in and with the law... better start thinking about the LSAT.

[mummer43]

Originally posted by reid-oclg
mdma and magic mushrooms are reportedly suppose to stay in your central nervous system for and undertimined amount of time. One of the rationales for not allowing people with use of illicit mind altering drugs is the fear of "relapse" during high stress encounters. Your MJ use is questinable if you were to stop and wait 5-10 years, but the other things....until science prooves otherwise, will preclude you from working in any LE agency that looks into drug usage as a possible disqualifier.

In short, if you still want to work in and with the law... better start thinking about the LSAT.

That's false, they do not stay in your system. My advice would be to give it a few years and then apply. During that time stay away from that activity and anyone who does that kind fo thing. Show a pattern of responsibility.

[RICO73]

Noticed you were interested in NJSP:

Here's NJSP's drug DQ info:
1. If you have used marijuana or hashish within the past three years.

2. If you have possessed or used anabolic steroids, other than those prescribed by a physician, since February 27, 1991.

3. If you have possessed or used any other illegal drug or drugs other than those prescribed or provided by a physician or purchased over the counter (including the use of anabolic steroids after February 27, 1991).

4. If you have ever sold, or given an illegal drug to another person in your life.

5. If you have ever manufactured an illegal drug at any time in your life.


I believe other NJ LE follow pretty much the same guidelines.

[DMadarang]

If you decide to go against the prevailing advice and apply anyway, you'd do yourself a favor by removing the words "Experimented" and "Youthful Indiscretion" from your vocabulary, unless your ambition is to see panel members roll their eyes and deep-six your application.

My suggested alternatives? "Used drugs." "Made some very bad decisions."

Given enough distance (in terms of time, non-use, non-association with your chucklehead friends who still use, exemplary conduct & work peformance) you might be able to amend that down the line to "Used drugs years ago." "Made some very bad decisions, but learned from them and took affirmative steps to grow."

It still won't get you over the DQ Hurdle for a lot of (most?) agencies, but you might still find a niche in the private sector or in non-LE government. Applying now-- or anytime soon-- will only waste your time, paper, and wear & tear on your interview suits.

[mcclain2nd]

Years down the road, there will be many more applicants going for the same job, who have similiar, the same qualifications, or better ones, who do not have your drug use history. Point is, even if time was all that you needed to put behind you, it will not mater one bit. I KNOW for a FACT that you would NEVER be hired by the Maryland State Police. Many of the users of this forum are not offering you mere opinions, they know their departments well and know the hiring practices of their departments well. I believe that the youth of today seem to forget that the decisions they make today actually WILL effect their future, even if it is not a direct effect at the time of the actions taking place. Advice that was already given, law school, seems as though it may be a good supporting role in the law enforcement field for you. Gary

[krellum]

That's false, they do not stay in your system.

The drug, itself, may not actually stay in your system, but whatever hallucinongenic effect the drug had on your brain CAN re-manifest itself at a future date; flashbacks are very real and they DO occur, not because the drug is still there, but because your brain remembers what you did to it by exposing it to the drug and treats you to a "repeat performance," of sorts. That's the reason why hallucinogens are normally auto DQ's - it has nothing to do with the drugs still being there.

Also, the only real "authority" for what one agency will/will not accept is a representative from that agency. I don't think you'll find anyone who can tell you with 100% certainty how the agency will view the issue other than the agency, itself. I'd ask them.

k

[J-WS6]

Finish your degree, do 4 years in Military, then get your Masters, and THEN try to get into Law enforcement.

[gbcop]

I know of a guy that used to work in my area that had done that with alot more frequency along with cocaine. I don't know if he lied on his ap or what, but he was hired and damn he could find some dope.... But once he got that badge he got a complex... Needless to say he made several stupid mistakes and moved on to a different department after he was forced to resign.... I'd say there's hope given enough time.

[netman1019]

Chvylmna41

First of all, I appreciate your openness in discussing this topic. I think for many folks it's an embarassing topic to bring up.

"When you're young, you do stupid things, but I don't feel that my youthful indiscretions should necessarily DQ me from employment"

I hate to sound overly harsh here, but you are not putting this drug usage into the proper perspective...and to some degree, I feel like that comment is sort've a cop out. You are calling them "youthful indiscretions" as if they happened many years ago, however several of these drugs were in use until last year. That's your first mistake. This is recent drug use. You need to be up front and honest with yourself about this.

From my experience in the application processes for both FBI and DEA, I can tell you that they have VERY clear guidelines about what is and what is not acceptable. According to DEA and FBI's guidelines, you would not pass.

Perhaps the best course of action for you would be to research each agency's drug use policy that you are interested in. However I think today at this moment, it's going to be a very difficult road for you to find a LE job. This is based on my opinion and experiences, but I feel pretty certain about this.

Jim

[Brad00111]

Just my 2 cents here-

I want to echo netman when I say it does take a lot to own up to your mistakes.

But….

Am I taking drug use too seriously when I think that someone with a Drug past like this has no place in Law Enforcement? I mean we are talking Felony infractions (at least in Arizona and I am sure most other places as well) and multiple times. You use the phrase “youthful indiscretions” well maybe ecstasy once would be but not 2 times, mushrooms 2 times and then marijuana off and on for 3 years??? You want to swear to uphold and protect the very law that you seem to have no problem violating, and violating in a major way. Law Enforcement Officers are granted the most extreme power out of any public official, the power to take away people’s freedom. I think I am happy to know that LE agencies have set up safeguards to prevent people with “serious” drug use from being hired. I hate to sound like an overbearing jerk, but I am pretty passionate about the drug question……….I may be in the minority and others may be more liberal on the drug issue, but for me its black and white.

I wish you the best of luck in any career that you choose.

Again just my 2 cents.

[chvylmna41]

I agree with everyone whole heartedly. I am by no means trying to justify my past. I agree that I made a lot of very "bad choices." But I have seen what drugs can do to people and I in fact take most of your positions right now.

I want to say thank you to everyone that replied that didn't have anything condescending to say b/c I was just asking a question. I know this is what you do for a living, but I don't need to be told how stupid I was for doing this. . . I already know. I'm trying to put all of that behind me now, and I have to live with my decisions even if it means giving up on LE.

[mummer43]

Originally posted by krellum
The drug, itself, may not actually stay in your system, but whatever hallucinongenic effect the drug had on your brain CAN re-manifest itself at a future date; flashbacks are very real and they DO occur, not because the drug is still there, but because your brain remembers what you did to it by exposing it to the drug and treats you to a "repeat performance," of sorts. That's the reason why hallucinogens are normally auto DQ's - it has nothing to do with the drugs still being there.

Also, the only real "authority" for what one agency will/will not accept is a representative from that agency. I don't think you'll find anyone who can tell you with 100% certainty how the agency will view the issue other than the agency, itself. I'd ask them.

k

That's a lot different than saying the drugs stay in your system, weather it be fat cells or spinal fluid(both false), for a long period of time. Do some research and you'll find that it's just not true.

As for an event triggering your brain into having a flashback, from what I've read that often occurs only with heavy usage and not with someone who only tried it once.

http://www.drug-rehab-addiction-treatment.com/lsd.html

[Justice]

chvylmna41 - The following is not commentary directed at you, however, relates to the topic.

I am actually surprised law enforcement agencies even allow ANY drug use in a person's past when it comes to employment. There are plenty of really good people who had enough common sense not to do drugs.

I would even be in support of a 100% clean policy. I know when I lecture to kids in high schools I tell them straight up, "If you use drugs AT ALL don't even bother applying. We do not want you."

It would be truly sad if I had to tell them the truth, "Well it is ok if you do drugs, but only if it is very rare and not within the last few months or years of your application. So if you are going to do drugs, do them now and that way by the time you apply you can blame it on 'youthful indiscretion'. Oh and try to stay away from the hard stuff probably wouldn't look good on an app."

[krellum]

That's a lot different than saying the drugs stay in your system, weather it be fat cells or spinal fluid(both false), for a long period of time. Do some research and you'll find that it's just not true.

Research notwhitstanding...the reason why people are DQ'd regarding hallucinogenic drug use is generally because of the usage, itself, and the possibility - however remote - for the effects to manifest themselves again, potentially at a very bad time (i.e. on duty).

My aim was to point out that it doesn't matter whether the drug "stays in the system", because the agency could care less if the actual hallucinogenic substance is still in your body or not; the fact is that if you used it, even if only once, it COULD be a factor later on - even many years after the fact.

It may be a lesser risk for those with short-term or single use, but it's a risk just the same. There are plenty of baby boomers out there who only "tried" LSD once and still have flashbacks, even though they were never considered to be "regular" users. Agencies are not concerned with the drug being in the body; they're concerned with the potential liability of drugs that have been known to have the same hallucinogenic effects much later after using them, and as long as the possibility exists, that person is a liability to the agency, no matter how solid they are as an individual. That's why many hallucinogenic drugs are auto DQ's, regardless of when the person used it.

k

[J-Mann]

Let's look at it from a different standpoint:

Defense Attorney: So Officer/Agent J. you arrested my client for possession of X (any drug).

Officer/Agent: Yes, that is correct.

DA: Well, O/A have you ever used illegal drugs before?

O/A: A. "Yes" B. "Yes, but....." C. "Uhhhhhhh"

As you can see it goes downhill from here.

It all boils down to the fact that can YOU and HAVE YOU been compliant with the laws society has set forth for you to possibly enforce one day. And if you have not, how gross is that deviation from what is expected from an officer/agent (ie: speeding v.s. illegal drug use).


J-Mann

[OH2FL]

Ok - J-Mann:
Answer: Yes.
Atty: Oh, and you sold like my client did?
A: No
Atty: And if you were in my clients situation, when you had used drugs, would you of been arrested?
A: Yes
Atty: etc. etc...

Importance ~ Integrity - Do not lie.... R-E-S-P-E-C-T


Justice ~
Why stop there?
:huh?: Any smokers should NOT be LEO. Bye - bye... that gets rid of 7/8 of MY competition.
:huh?: Has anyone DRANK ANY alcohol.... That leads to DUI. Bye-bye.... (this is getting easier by the regulation).
:huh?: Hey - if you've sped in ANY car - sitting here at the Poly - in the last..... 10 years.... heh-heh-hehhhh
I need a horse....

:ahh!: Heh - while we're at it.... I had an ATV accident in '99 & was on Morphine for about a week.... that should be a no-no too.

Anyone on Oxy-Cotton? Tylenol 3 w/ Coddiene...

Going too far.

Guys / Gals
Good luck
Do well
Keep the faith

#1) Never give up your integrity. Don't lie, ever.

Then there's the Cartoon my father stuck behind my High School diploma.
"Ziggy"
"Life is like a Kleenex. Not much good once you've blown it"

[Brad00111]

OH2FL-

Devils advocate here-

Somking = NOT ILLEGAL
Drinking (Over 21) = NOT ILLEGAL
Speeding = letter of the law yea illegal, not a FELONY

doing mushrooms and ecstacy is a FELONY

Morphine tylenol etc etc was perscribed by a licensed doctor, if it wasnt, you should not be a LEO.

It comes down to respect for the law and being responsible........while admitting your mistakes is nobel, not very responsible, some are more responsible than others and thus are better candidates that others........and for some things you shouldnt be a candidate at all.........drug use is probably one of them.

Just my 2 cents, but i thought you took it to a little bit of an extreme above :hustle:

[Justice]

Brad00111, you beat me to responding to OH2FL. I could not have said it better.

[Virgilthetiger]

most of these drugs we are discussing will (depends on the amount of use) will cause changes in your brain chemistry or brain cell sub-structure. In some cases these changes are permament.





my feeling is with light use flashbacks are more a psych problem rather than a medical problem.

regular use you actually end up with a chemically damaged brain, a medical problem.


virgil

[OH2FL]

Brad ~ It was WAY too extreme and over the top above - I was being.... bad :cool: I apologize guys.
I was just in a :p mood.
:idea: Maybe is was an MJ flashback ~ w/o the munchies.
~ oh ok... I admit.... I had a bit of Peach Schnapps that night and was feeling warm & fuzzy all over. :hustle:
Give me a break - I was home.

:) (smile guys & gals)

I'm not an advocate of the use of any drug.
I was just trying to be a bit - facetious. To the one remark of "any drug use".

(To clarify that remark ~ I had tried MJ once in '78 & I was terrified about that indescretion until a couple years ago)
- - and yes, concerned everytime I had to testify in court on a related arrest :eek:
And ~ I do like the MJ commercials that are playing these days on the radio and TV.
Very good to the point. "Just tell them you were getting high....."



You all have good points.
Thanks for the rebuttal.

Mike ~ still in Ohio ;)

[ATF SAC]

Just doing a little housekeeping and moved this into the appropriate forum for this discussion. Look around this forum and you will see the posting of the specific drug policies for ATF and the FBI, which are fact not opinion or interpretation. Get an extra moment or two will copy over the NJSP policy to that thread. Invite some of the others who discussed their agency policies to post them in that thread. Concept was to build a reference point on this issue.

Have to say that I am glad the poster has put drug use in the past and there are plenty of great opportunities for a rich productive life, just not in LE as a sworn officer. Personally agree with the poster who said to lighten up excusing yourself with "youthful indiscretion" particularly when your youth was last year and you are presumptively about 17 or 18. Old enough to know lots better and the reasons for getting away from drugs should be about you and not about a particular job interest. That MPA looks good to me and when you finish it you will be at a point where "youthful indiscretion" might be a better term. You can do a check then to see if anything has changed or perhaps your interests will have changed. Just focus on the goals of keeping clean and using those smarts for the time being.

[RICO73]

ATF SAC-

Thought I would include here the link to NJSP (New Jersey State Police) disqualification information site for your reference:
(just to show I wasn't making this up and show the rest of the criteria if needed)

link (http://www.njsp.org/recruit/disqual.html)

[mummer43]

Originally posted by Brad00111
OH2FL-

doing mushrooms and ecstacy is a FELONY



Doing mushrooms and ecstacy is not a felony. Possessing it and selling it is a felony. There's a difference.

[Brad00111]

if your "doing it" that means its in your body which means its in your possession, there is no difference.

[mummer43]

Originally posted by Brad00111
if your "doing it" that means its in your body which means its in your possession, there is no difference.

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think it's illegal to be under the influence of any substance. Also, if you are using it you are only possessing a very small amount of it and you may never actually possess it at all.

[UncleSugar]

Originally posted by chvylmna41
. . . but I don't feel that my youthful indiscretions should necessarily DQ me from employment. . . Youthful indiscretions? You used shrooms about a year ago! BTW, using drugs repeatedly over a three year period is outside my definition of experimentation, and many LE agencies may see it the same way.

However, you can't change the past. Apply, be honest and maybe you will find an agency that will accept your past use of illegal drugs.

[UncleSugar]

Originally posted by Brad00111
if your "doing it" that means its in your body which means its in your possession, there is no difference.

Actually Brad the only jurisdiction I know of that can punish for use is the military under Article 112 of the UCMJ. Every other law I have seen discusses possession, and distribution. Having the narcotics in the blood stream is not considered posession as far as I know.

However, I could be wrong so if someone other than the military prosecutes use please let me know.

[CollegeBoy427]

Originally posted by UncleSugar
Actually Brad the only jurisdiction I know of that can punish for use is the military under Article 112 of the UCMJ. Every other law I have seen discusses possession, and distribution. Having the narcotics in the blood stream is not considered posession as far as I know.

However, I could be wrong so if someone other than the military prosecutes use please let me know.

At my college, we had a problem with underage drinking. They said if we got caught with any ammount of alcohol on us, we would get charged with underage consumption, and possession.

zach

[RutgersGrad]

Ok, here's my question. If you want to be a law enforcement officer so bad, then why were you using shrooms less than a year ago? Somebody who has been using drugs on and off for 3 years doesn't deserve to be anywhere near law enforcement. There are plenty of well qualified people looking for police jobs in New Jersey. I know plenty of good people who want LEO jobs in this state and can't get them. The competition is tough. Why would any department want to hire you? I live in New Jersey and work in law enforcement and I hope that you NEVER land any type of job in this field. You don't deserve it.

[mummer43]

Originally posted by J-Mann
Let's look at it from a different standpoint:

Defense Attorney: So Officer/Agent J. you arrested my client for possession of X (any drug).

Officer/Agent: Yes, that is correct.

DA: Well, O/A have you ever used illegal drugs before?

O/A: A. "Yes" B. "Yes, but....." C. "Uhhhhhhh"

As you can see it goes downhill from here.

It all boils down to the fact that can YOU and HAVE YOU been compliant with the laws society has set forth for you to possibly enforce one day. And if you have not, how gross is that deviation from what is expected from an officer/agent (ie: speeding v.s. illegal drug use).


J-Mann

That would never happen. Here is how it would play out:

Defense Attorney: You arrested my client for possession of drugs?

Officer: Yes, I did.

Defense Attorney: Have you ever used drugs?

DA: OBJECTION!!! That isn't relevant to this case and the officer isn't on trial here.

Judge: Sustained! And if you pull another stunt like that, I'll hold you in contempt.

That's pretty much how it would go and you're living in a dream world if you think otherwise.

[ATF SAC]

OK, you are bringing out my bad side. We do not have to deal with hypotheticals about what may happen. If you used drugs beyond MJ in the stated limits you are out of the process. We do not have to argue it or debate it, we just have to select from the 10's of thousands of polygraphed, tested and investigated applicants who do not present this issue. Used more than MJ at age 15? You are cooked, it is over for you. Not arguable more than bitchin'. Get lots of discussion around here about why that isn't "fair". So what. Good lesson for future LE, none of it is fair, everybody has a story about how it is not really their fault. How it really works. Get into double digits on age and you are accountable for voluntary choices you made.

[chvylmna41]

Originally posted by RutgersGrad:
"Why would any department want to hire you? I live in New Jersey and work in law enforcement and I hope that you NEVER land any type of job in this field. You don't deserve it."

See, this is the type of petty bull shit that shouldn't be allowed on these boards. People like RutgersGrad just like to get up on their high horses and preach and sound foolish. I was just asking a question. . .i wasn't attacking you, so don't attack me.

This is a place where those interested in the field can ask questions and get answers from experienced professionals. Take two advil, get a grip and then TRY and post in a rational manner.

I've seen the mistakes of my past (regardless of how recent it was) and I have to deal with them and I am. . .I've decided to go to Grad School and get my Master's Degree in Public Administration, and I'm toying with the idea of enlisting. When I get out I will put in my apps. and I hope that maybe some agency will see that I have matured and put all that foolishness behind me.

[ATF SAC]

To tell someone you don't know,that you hope they NEVER get this or that is over the top and it was my miss not to cull it.

chevylmna41, your initial take that actions of less than a year ago were some how in the misty past are not the first time such statements have been made and saying such things is an invitation to be called out on it.

You both have had your swings, not to be repeated. 'Nuff said?

[mummer43]

Originally posted by ATF SAC
OK, you are bringing out my bad side. We do not have to deal with hypotheticals about what may happen. If you used drugs beyond MJ in the stated limits you are out of the process. We do not have to argue it or debate it, we just have to select from the 10's of thousands of polygraphed, tested and investigated applicants who do not present this issue. Used more than MJ at age 15? You are cooked, it is over for you. Not arguable more than bitchin'. Get lots of discussion around here about why that isn't "fair". So what. Good lesson for future LE, none of it is fair, everybody has a story about how it is not really their fault. How it really works. Get into double digits on age and you are accountable for voluntary choices you made.

That's not true with every agency. Like I said on another board, there are a lot of high horses being ridden around here.

[chvylmna41]

You're right ATF SAC, my initial post was just me trying to downplay my past b/c I had a good idea of what the responses were going to be like. I guess I was just trying to make myself feel better b/c I feel like a fool for the things I did in my past (again regardless of how recent that past is).

Now the question becomes, if I enlist (4yrs) and get my Master's Degree (obviously not touching any substance during that period), does anyone think that I can be hired.

And please, I know some of you think that any drug use should automatically DQ me, so I want some unbiased opinions. :)

[2DecadeFed]

Ok....let us get a couple mis-notions straight. chvylmna41 your drug usage is recent and it was way... way... past..."youthful". mummer43 to take x or eat mushrooms you have to put it in your hand to your mouth...that is possession. I have been on the stand and there are attorneys and judges that have used (and allowed) that line of questioning. This is the bottem line... these are specialized, well paying postions and the Goverment can simply put any criteria they wish..With very few exceptions drug usage is allowable under a certain age and certain amount. There are no "high horses".... people here are upset here because they have through out their "youthful life" kept clean. It is not easy to be the odd man out, to stay away from narcotics at parties while in HS or college but beleive it or not ...there are people who have. These law enfocement jobs are for people who are clear of mind and commited. The reward for staying clean, keeping away from the law and doing the right thing...... is a job in Federal , State or Local Law Enforcement. If you did the wrong things, TAKE ANOTHER CARRER PATH. Not all of us can be a Doctor, or work for NASA......chvylmna41..... law enforcment is your NASA, more than likely you will never see the inside of that rocket.

[mummer43]

Originally posted by 2DecadeFed
Ok mummer43 to take x or eat mushrooms you have to put it in your hand to your mouth...that is possession. I have been on the stand and there are attorneys and judges that have used (and allowed) that line of questioning.

Even if you do possess it, the amount you possess would not make it a felony. Believe or not, there are ways to take drugs without actually possessing them. As for a judge allowing that line of questioning, I've been testifying in court on drug cases for a while now and I've never encountered anything remotely like that and I have a VERY hard time believing that it would be allowed.

We've lost sight of the original quesiton here and that is does chvylmna41 have a shot at getting a LE job. Right now, I would say no, but if he puts time between when he applies and the questionable activity, he MAY get hired.

Someone, I can't remember who, made a good point about drug use and becoming a LE officer. Put simply agencies are relaxing their standards because more and more young people are trying drugs and if they had a zero tolereance policy, they would lose a lot of qualified applicants. it's simply the way it is in today's society. You may not like it, but there's nothing you can do about it.

Also, I know of agencies that allow some experimentation with drugs other than MJ as long as there is a certain amount of time between application and use. Drug use among young people is not going to stop and frankly, I don't see minor experimentaion with certain drugs as a problem as long as it's wasn't habitual and it was done at a young age.

[Cascade]

Originally posted by chvylmna41
You're right ATF SAC, my initial post was just me trying to downplay my past b/c I had a good idea of what the responses were going to be like. I guess I was just trying to make myself feel better b/c I feel like a fool for the things I did in my past (again regardless of how recent that past is).

Now the question becomes, if I enlist (4yrs) and get my Master's Degree (obviously not touching any substance during that period), does anyone think that I can be hired.

And please, I know some of you think that any drug use should automatically DQ me, so I want some unbiased opinions. :)


Pretty hard to get unbiased opinions on this one. But, I'd say it depends. Enlisting for four years and earning a Master's can't hurt. And, in case you still cannot get hired by an agency, you'll open up other doors for yourself. Some agencies have automatic disqualifers. I'd have to say that no matter what you do, you'll never earn a DEA badge, for obvious reasons. But, that does not necessarily mean some agency won't hire you. Give some thought as to where you want to apply and then take your question straight to the source.

Good luck.

[2DecadeFed]

Originally posted by mummer43
I don't see minor experimentaion with certain drugs as a problem as long as it's wasn't habitual and it was done at a young age.

mummer that is simply nonsense. First of all it is*** illegal *** at any age to use marjuana, x, meth, etc..... It is just your attitude that is leading society down the path of... ..it's OK...It is not OK... to use drugs. They are killing are youth, our cops and everyone in between, and say what you will but it is" a problem". That first x pill your teenager takes for fun at a dance, at 14yoa and it kills your child (and I hope it never happens to you). I can promise you would sing a much different tune.

Point here is these are jobs for people who stay clean and straight....No exceptions.....nuff said......................:flame:

[dmclark]

Mummer: You're not going to get very far on this Drugs and LE forum with that "no problem" attitude. I fully agree with 2DecadeFed.

[mummer43]

I never said it was right to use drugs... I don't feel that way, nor will I ever. I simply said that if a person experimented(tried once) with drugs and they are well qualified for a LE job, then they should not be disqualified due to that mistake. Especially if that mistake occured several years prior to them applying.

[mummer43]

Originally posted by 2DecadeFed
Point here is these are jobs for people who stay clean and straight....No exceptions.....nuff said......................:flame:

That's not true because there are agencies that allow some drug use. And please don't tell me that all cops are "clean and straight" or have never done anything outside the law. If you believe that, I have some swampland to sell you in Florida.

[dmclark]

There ARE some agencies that will allow limited experimentation with MJ, some with coke. Almost ALL will DQ you for anything hallucinogenic.

The question is which one you want to go to and what you can qualify for. DM

[DMadarang]

Originally posted by mummer43
I simply said that if a person experimented(tried once) with drugs and they are well qualified for a LE job, then they should not be disqualified due to that mistake.
If the hiring agency sets a drug-free lifestyle a qualication, and your hypothetical person "experimented" with drugs, then he/she isn't well-qualified.

I have my share of blemishes. Drugs aren't among them, but I've been forthright with every agency I've applied to, and hold no ill will toward any agency which passed me over in favor of a better "fit." It doesn't matter how competent an investigator I am, or how otherwise "qualified" I might be. Their house, their rules, their right to pick and choose their standards.

We're not talking about non-controllable factors here-- not race, not physical attributes, not DNA makeup. We're talking about CONDUCT. We impose consequences on others for past conduct every day in a professional setting, and this is no different. Make your choices, accept your consequences.

[2DecadeFed]

Mummer I realize that you are a parole officer and deal with people everyday that have gotten into trouble. More than likely 2/3 of those problems involved drugs.....People can get better and live a new life but those people should never be in Law Enforcement. You are applying with the PA State Troopers and you better hope that the your backup at 3:00 in the morning isn't high on prescription or illegal drugs when your getting shot at during a traffic stop. Law Enforcement officers are not prefect but ONCE AGAIN, the reward for staying clean and having little to no exposure to these narcotics, is the avalibility of these jobs. If you are using drugs illegally into your 20's you have a problem...and why should any Law Enforcement agency take a risk on you when there are so many applicants that have done little to nothing. You can not change hiring practices that have been around for decades +. I can tell you in my Agency we have never knowingly hired a dirty cop, neither has any Agency in the US.........So what is your point.........Right ,there isn't one...........Cops aren't perfectI.............No kidding...............You would not put one of your paroles in elementary school if they were child molesters. Why would you put a individual in drug (law enforcement) unit if they have tryed drugs in the last 12 months....Think About it......No goverment enity is looking for that kind of liablity.

[mummer43]

Originally posted by 2DecadeFed
Mummer I realize that you are a parole officer and deal with people everyday that have gotten into trouble. More than likely 2/3 of those problems involved drugs.....People can get better and live a new life but those people should never be in Law Enforcement. You are applying with the PA State Troopers and you better hope that the your backup at 3:00 in the morning isn't high on prescription or illegal drugs when your getting shot at during a traffic stop. Law Enforcement officers are not prefect but ONCE AGAIN, the reward for staying clean and having little to no exposure to these narcotics, is the avalibility of these jobs. If you are using drugs illegally into your 20's you have a problem...and why should any Law Enforcement agency take a risk on you when there are so many applicants that have done little to nothing. You can not change hiring practices that have been around for decades +. I can tell you in my Agency we have never knowingly hired a dirty cop, neither has any Agency in the US.........So what is your point.........Right ,there isn't one...........Cops aren't perfectI.............No kidding...............You would not put one of your paroles in elementary school if they were child molesters. Why would you put a individual in drug (law enforcement) unit if they have tryed drugs in the last 12 months....Think About it......No goverment enity is looking for that kind of liablity.


Point taken. Let me get one thing straight before I drop out of this thread. I am not talking about individuals who are using drugs into their 20's. If they are in their 20's and still using drugs then they should definitely NOT be hired by any LE agency. What I'm talking about it is a teenager who maybe got caught up in a bad crowd, had a bad home life or just made a bad chioce and tried drugs.

Also, none of this has anything to do with seeing people I deal with at work who clean up their act. They have no business in this profession. As for the PA State Police, their drug use standards seem pretty liberal, at least on paper, and they are one of the most respected Law Enforcement agencies in the country. See the link below.

http://www.psp.state.pa.us/bhr/cwp/view.asp?a=435&q=153226&PM=1&bhrNav=|6957|6959|

[dmclark]

I think there drug use requirements are absurd, respected or not. LSD and X use is OK after three years? Pathetic and that's my opinion. I've worked with the PSP and this is NOT a standard that any agency should emulate.

It's a cave-in, pure and simple.

[mummer43]

Originally posted by dmclark
I think there drug use requirements are absurd, respected or not. LSD and X use is OK after three years? Pathetic and that's my opinion. I've worked with the PSP and this is NOT a standard that any agency should emulate.

It's a cave-in, pure and simple.

It is kind of surprising, however I'd like to see how many people they take who actually did that stuff 3 years before they applied.

[Cascade]

Hopefully, in my humble opinion, they would not take any people who have used those drugs within three years. And, I doubt they do. Like it's been said, thousands of us apply for just a few slots. Agencies don't NEED to take anyone who is not extremely qualified.

[SrA Scott]

Originally posted by Justice

I would even be in support of a 100% clean policy. I know when I lecture to kids in high schools I tell them straight up, "If you use drugs AT ALL don't even bother applying. We do not want you."



I'm a social studies teacher at a continuation high school. I've been in this field for almost 10 years.

Many times my students will tell me about their aspirations to join the Army, become a Border Patrol Agent, join the police force, etc. On such occasions I tell them up one side and down the other, "if you're using or have ever used drugs of any sort in the past -- bud, ecstasy, meth, anything -- you can forget about these jobs. Realistically speaking, you don't have a chance and you're not going to get in. A background investigation will always reveal what you've done and when you did it, one way or the other. Believe it."

My message to the students is this: drug use of any sort will more than likely wreck your future options if not destroy your life completely (by landing you in a hospital, a jail, or a cemetery), so DON'T FOOL WITH THEM!

[FLdeputy]

chvylmna41,

Just out of curiosity... If you could start tomorrow, what type of agency (local, state, federal) would be your first choice?

FLdeputy

[chvylmna41]

I know that Fed. LE is out of the question. But if I was to start tomorrow, I think I would lean more toward State LE. But I've also been thinking of Local LE also, so I'm not completely sure.

Why??