Police Officer Preparation & Law Enforcement Resource - Archive

Hello,

I am looking to get into law enforcement and I have a question. I'm 23 and I'm about to graduate from a 4 year college with a BA in History and Sociology/Criminology. I've worked private security for nearly 5 years to get experience and I've never been arrested for anything nor have I used any drugs. However, in 2006 I got into an accident while driving my mothers car. She had allowed her car insurance to lapse which meant trouble for me. The driving w/o insurance ticket was dismissed but since I the claim was denied, the DMV suspended my license in 2007 until I bought SR-22 insurance which I promptly did. I carried it for the necessary length of time and I am now free from that obligation. I carry regular car insurance and have an otherwise squeaky clean driving record (no tickets, no red light camera tickets, literally nothing). Will that suspension for insurance prevent me from finding a police job in Illinois?

Thanks!

If that is all you have against you I wouldn't worry too much about an automatic DQ.

Really? Because Sun Prairie Wisconsin just gave my application the boot.

Really? Because Sun Prairie Wisconsin just gave my application the boot.

They gave your application the boot between your first post and your second?

hahahaha. no, they rejected my application this morning.

hahahaha. no, they rejected my application this morning.

Did they give you a reason?

yup. they said that because my license was suspended in the last 5 years, they wouldn't consider my application.

yup. they said that because my license was suspended in the last 5 years, they wouldn't consider my application.

Well, 2007 to 2011 should make the 5 years up very soon. Different departments will have different rules. This is not a permanant DQ the way some things might be, so the worst case is you would have to wait a bit...

-Citicop.

Moved to the regular Ask-A-Cop section as it doesn't seem to be a writers question.

A license suspension isn't good. But , it can be overcome if that is ALL of the bad you bring to the table.

thank you all. I was ultimately able to talk my way back into consideration at Sun Prairie, but I doubt it will go anywhere. I mean, who the hell wants to hire a man with two degrees, 5 years experience in private security and 95 without any preference points on the test if he's got a financial suspension from his freshman year of college?

thank you all. I was ultimately able to talk my way back into consideration at Sun Prairie, but I doubt it will go anywhere. I mean, who the hell wants to hire a man with two degrees, 5 years experience in private security and 95 without any preference points on the test if he's got a financial suspension from his freshman year of college?

Is that an attempt at sarcasm?

thank you all. I was ultimately able to talk my way back into consideration at Sun Prairie, but I doubt it will go anywhere. I mean, who the hell wants to hire a man with two degrees, 5 years experience in private security and 95 without any preference points on the test if he's got a financial suspension from his freshman year of college?
Driving without insurance is a big deal. Especially to the person who's car you might hit and the person who might get injured in the wreck. You can blame your mother all you want, you were still responsible.

BTW, 5 years of private security means nothing more than working as a clerk in a grocery store.

Depending on where you apply, 2 degrees is no better than 1, either. Nor are graduate degrees. Just another box to put an "X" in.

Compared to MANY candidates, what you described is essentially a non-issue.

It was a "kinda" long time ago. It was due to another person's f'up. I don't know how this SR-22 "Insurance on your license" thing works as we don't have it in Massachusetts. But I'd think that if you were driving a car registered to another person, you wouldn't be overly liable for its lack of insurance. Can anyone confirm that the OP's story is a possibility?

I say "kinda" long time ago because I remember when I used to think four years ago was a loooong time since my last ticket and surely no one would care. I now look back and laugh at that.

Just stay squeaky clean. You don't want anything like a minor ticket for something to reset your time since your last issue...

But I'd think that if you were driving a car registered to another person, you wouldn't be overly liable for its lack of insurance. Can anyone confirm that the OP's story is a possibility?


If you're driving the car, you're responsible for everything about it, including whether it has insurance or the brake lights work. If he crashes the car, the problems will be the same for the other people involved as much as if the owner was driving.

Edit: We cite people all the time for driving w/o insurance in someone else's car. The law requires the driver to show proof as well as the owner to carry it. And the driver gets suspended until he shows proof of filing, ergo SR 22, at least in Oregon.

If you're driving the car, you're responsible for everything about it, including whether it has insurance or the brake lights work. If he crashes the car, the problems will be the same for the other people involved as much as if the owner was driving.

Edit: We cite people all the time for driving w/o insurance in someone else's car. The law requires the driver to show proof as well as the owner to carry it. And the driver gets suspended until he shows proof of filing, ergo SR 22, at least in Oregon.

I used to cite the driver here until a magistrate corrected me on it in my first year or so. Our statute is as follows:



§ 1786. Required financial responsibility.
(a) General rule.--Every motor vehicle of the type required
to be registered under this title which is operated or currently
registered shall be covered by financial responsibility.
(f) Operation of a motor vehicle without required financial
responsibility.--Any owner of a motor vehicle for which the
existence of financial responsibility is a requirement for its
legal operation shall not operate the motor vehicle or permit it
to be operated upon a highway of this Commonwealth without the
financial responsibility required by this chapter. In addition
to the penalties provided by subsection (d), any person who
fails to comply with this subsection commits a summary offense
and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of $300.

Since then I always cite the owner. If someone can show me a different statute for it I'm all ears, but it makes sense when you read the statute.

This is Oregon's:


GENERAL PROVISIONS
806.010 Driving uninsured prohibited;
penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of
driving uninsured if the person operates a
motor vehicle in this state on any highway
or premises open to the public in this state
without either:
(a) The person being insured while driving
the vehicle under a motor vehicle liability
insurance policy that meets the
requirements described under ORS 806.080;
or
(b) The person or the owner of the vehicle
providing the Department of Transportation
with other satisfactory proof of
compliance with the financial responsibility
requirements of this state.
(2) Exemptions from this section are established
under ORS 806.020.
(3) In addition to other penalties under
this section the following apply:
(a) A person who is involved in a motor
vehicle accident at any time the person is in
violation of this section is subject to suspension
of the person’s driving privileges under
ORS 809.417.
(b) A person who is convicted of violating
this section is subject to ORS 806.230, if the
person does not make future responsibility
filings as required by that section.
(4) A person convicted for violation of
this section must file with the department,
and thereafter maintain for a period of three
years, proof of financial responsibility that
complies with ORS 806.060. Failure to comply
with this subsection is subject to ORS
809.415.
(5) The offense described in this section,
driving uninsured, is a Class B traffic violation.
[1983 c.338 §837; 1985 c.16 §422; 1985 c.714 §1;
1991 c.350 §1; 1991 c.702 §4; 2003 c.402 §12]


Maybe the East coast is different. But this makes sense to me, you cite the driver, not the owner if the tags are expired, don't you?

So interesting how states' laws are so different.

Here it's "Whoever operates or permits to be operated or permits to remain on a public or private way". Owner or operator. A quick conversation with the operator helps me decide who's getting the summons. Does the operator have their own car? Does the registered owner have another car that they usually drive? Any receipts in the car with owner's or operator's name for gas or repairs? Is one party squeaky-clean while the other has prior uninsured charges?

This is Oregon's:



Maybe the East coast is different. But this makes sense to me, you cite the driver, not the owner if the tags are expired, don't you?

In that case you can go either way:


§ 1301. Registration and certificate of title required.
(a) Driving unregistered vehicle prohibited.--No person
shall drive or move and no owner or motor carrier shall
knowingly permit to be driven or moved upon any highway any
vehicle which is not registered in this Commonwealth unless the
vehicle is exempt from registration.


No one said PA made sense. I guess they feel if someone lets you borrow their car it shouldnt be your responsibility to ensure it is insured.

So interesting how states' laws are so different.

Here it's "Whoever operates or permits to be operated or permits to remain on a public or private way". Owner or operator. A quick conversation with the operator helps me decide who's getting the summons. Does the operator have their own car? Does the registered owner have another car that they usually drive? Any receipts in the car with owner's or operator's name for gas or repairs? Is one party squeaky-clean while the other has prior uninsured charges?

If the driver crashes the car, the owner is responsible for injuries and damage. But it's up to the driver to make sure the vehicle he's driving has proper insurance on it. I can't even cite the owner if he's not driving. The owner has to give proof of insurance when he registers the car, but that's it unless he's driving the car.