Traffic and Debt Question

[Valor55]

[QUOTE=180]Man you guys are contentious this late at night (but I think I like it)! Just to be as straight-forward as ya'll...my post says

"My record is clean for the last 7 years" and then goes on to parenthetically define "clean" with the words "absolutely no moving violations." (Does this exonerate my misguidedness?)

That kind of quibbling and equivocation would probably get you disqualified as deceptive from any police application.

[180]

Oh my word you guys (used generically, of course) are something else. I will have to disagree with you, Valor55, that kind of admission (stated that way on at least 3 applications) has been well received. I admitted to all and separated them by moving and non-moving violations.

I think you guys need to be a little bit careful in threatening people with "disqualifications" on account of the statements in my earlier post. I can feel the heat coming now--this is where everybody yells at me on this forum for being "a stupid civilian." I just think you need to be careful of making broad generalities, IMO.

Yes, I am both a pilot and a teacher (for those that are questioning the integrity of my posts). It really is possible (and, in my case, true). One I do professionally (the later) and the other I do as a hobby (the former).

There is love here, I know we can find it!

[Terminator]

I think you guys need to be a little bit careful in threatening people with "disqualifications" on account of the statements in my earlier post.

No one is threatening you with disqualifications (whatever that is supposed to mean). You were simply told something would get you disqualified from the hiring process.

[180]

No one is threatening you with disqualifications (whatever that is supposed to mean). You were simply told something would get you disqualified from the hiring process.

Thank you, I understood. I just disagreed. In my experience, making a distinction between non-moving and moving violations when operating on principles of full-disclosure is not, IMO, going to get somebody disqualified from the hiring process.

I just disagree, that's all.

And, in keeping with my previous post, I think it is a little misleading to characterize the making of distinctions in full-disclosure of one's traffic history as cause for disqualification from the process. Again, this has not been my experience. I do believe, however, that seeking to hide the truth--or make bad facts look good--is not a good practice that could lead to disqualification. (Perhaps that's what the real intention was behind the comment in the first place).

Good interaction, thanks, 180

[Terminator]

[Bearcat06]

[Terminator]

[Terminator]

[ngcsubutterbar]

This one is dead as well.