hi i am applying for the sherrifs and i was wondering about drug
usage. i experimented with a lot of drugs but it was like 6 years ago
and since then i been in the military and just recently got back from
iraq. i hope that my experimentel passed doesnt efect me . it was a
long time ago. help

---

Request for Question Clarification by tutuzdad-ga on 07 Mar 2006 10:42 PST

What is your question?

---

Clarification of Question by cs26190428-ga on 07 Mar 2006 11:20 PST

does my passed drug use 6 years ago going to affect me getting hired
with the los angeles county sheriffs department. i have a background
appoint on the 21st of march.

---

Request for Question Clarification by cynthia-ga on 07 Mar 2006 15:24 PST

Have you read this?

DEPUTY SHERIFF TRAINEE
http://www.lasd.org/recruitment/J2707-dst.pdf

SPECIAL INFORMATION: Successful candidates must complete a thorough
background investigation, including a fingerprint search and a
polygraph test. Examples of disqualifying factors include:

? Any felony convictions
? Job related misdemeanor convictions
? Certain serious traffic convictions or patterns of traffic
violations. (3 moving violations in one year; failure to appear;
at fault accidents; suspended license; driving under the influence)
? Poor credit history
? Poor employment history
? Substance abuse
? Anyone on probation


As you can see, substance abuse is a disqualifying factor. You will be
given a polygraph examination, so it's a given they will ask you about
drug use.  The only thing you can do is go in, take the polygraph and
be honest in how long ago it was. I think because of the length of
time, there is a small possibility you will still qualify because of
the length of time ago, and if you pass the portion about NO RECENT
DRUG USE, but you should be ready to be told you are disqualified.

I can't really guess what they will conclude, as it is a judgment call
on the part of the recruiting/hiring office, but now you know you will
be questioned during a polygraph. Is this a satisfactory answer?

~~Cynthia

---

Clarification of Question by cs26190428-ga on 07 Mar 2006 16:25 PST

but it was 6 years ago and since then i have bben in the military and
served in iraq. i have another question. is a seatbelt ticket
considered a moving violation?

---

Request for Question Clarification by cynthia-ga on 07 Mar 2006 16:30 PST

..."but it was 6 years ago and since then i have bben [sic] in the military and
served in iraq..."

You can save the rhetoric for the polygraph examiner...

Failure to be strapped in is NOT a moving violation, according to this:

California Moving Violation List
http://www.sr22.net/violations.html

Would you like me to post my research as your answer?

---

Clarification of Question by cs26190428-ga on 07 Mar 2006 16:50 PST

thank you for the help but i think you misunderstood me. i am sorry.
but i wasn't a serious druggie. i tried different drugs once or twice
and that is it. and it has been a long time.

---

Clarification of Question by cs26190428-ga on 07 Mar 2006 17:40 PST

one of the disqualifiers says substance abuse. do you think trying a
couple of different drugs once or twice years ago disqualify me?

---

Request for Question Clarification by cynthia-ga on 07 Mar 2006 22:21 PST

My opinion is that from the drug use you have described, you would not
be disqualified, however, my opinion doesn't matter, the LASD's HR
department is who you have to worry about.

Don't worry, just go in on the 21st expecting a polygraph. Tell the
truth. They are mainly looking for liars, not someone who has tried
drugs in their youth. A lot of folks "try drugs" and then quit because
it's not in their life plan.

The main thing is not to lie during the polygraph.  Read that several
times, and you'll be fine.

---

Clarification of Question by cs26190428-ga on 07 Mar 2006 22:37 PST

thank you for your input. you have been a help

---

Request for Question Clarification by cynthia-ga on 25 Mar 2006 18:17 PST

Would you like me to post my research (finding the requirements in the
application and interview) and opinion (2nd clarification request) as
your answer?

Here's a thought. I know people who applied for law enforcement jobs
who had a drug history that was overlooked because it had been so long
ago, but they were later rejected anyway because of their horrific
writing and English skills. Just something to think about.

tutuzdad-ga

are you making fun of my writing. i know my writing has been bad on
this. typing and writing are two different things and i was in a
hurry. i have already taken the test and past the oral interview now i
just have to get through this background check. i can't wait untill it
is over. thank you for the info though.

While the site referred to above says Substance abuse is a
disqualification the ca government code just addresses "Any person
adjudged addicted or in danger of becoming addicted
to narcotics, convicted, and committed to a state institution as
provided in Section 3051 of the Welfare and Institutions Code." I
didn't find where it said anything about experimentation. I haven't
checked county or city(and won't). Most counties in the state go by
the state code I would think. I think you have a good shot.(it does
say abuse and not use, although some would say any use is abuse). You
could call and ask for some clarification.

More food for thought also from the government code

(g) This section shall not be construed to preclude the adoption
of additional or higher standards, including age.

I was not making fun of you at all; I was merely giving you something
to seriously consider though I can see how it might have come across
as sarcastic sounding. Some regular vistors already know this but
since you're new here I'll explain: I have been in law enforcement for
more than two decades and have quite a bit of insight into these
matters. Recruits nowdays are largely from the 1970's and 80's era
when drug experimentation was common. If departments root out everyone
who used drugs a few times there would be very few qualified
candidates to hire. What most departments are looking for is HONESTY
and INTELLIGENCE. I would tend to believe someone who said they
experimented with drugs in their youth was being honest than someone
who said they never had. In addition, if you admit to some youthful
experimentation and they give you a polygraph you don't have to worry
about failing the lie detector test, because if you fail a polygraph
you're out for sure. See what I mean?

tutuzdad-ga

I applied to the Stamford Police department in Connecticut in 1992 and
passes phase 1 (written Exam) phase 2 (physical exam) and then came
phase 3 ( Polygraph).  Out of a total of over 200 applicants I was one
of the four finalists and failed the polygraph due to "trying" drugs
in HS.  I tried to lie on the polygraph and maybe thats why I failed. 
Your only chance is to be honest which is what I should have done.

It depends on your department. I am currently a deputy sheriff.

Generally, the time required before employment (aka when the last time
you did the drug was)

Marijuana, 6 months
Cocaine, crack, speed 2-6 years
X 2-6 years, or not accepted at all
Mushrooms and other "organic" hallucinogens 6 years (or not at all)

LSD/PCP are usually instant disqualifiers, no matter the time frame.

Again, depends on your department.

Also, regarding the polygraph. You CANNOT be disqualified in
California based on poly/lie detector results alone.

They must find something in your background which corroborates the
"deception indicated" on the test.

AKA

Question: Have you ever used heroin?
You: No.

Test shows deception indicated.

The background investigator MUST BE ABLE to connect that answer with
something in your past. Lie detectors are helpful pointers to direct
an investigators attention to a certain area (like heroin use) but,
again, the results DO NOT mean instant disqualification.