Cookie Cutter Candidates vs. Candidates With Life Experience

[ClimbingHard]

This is my first post on this site and I must admit its a great resource for anyone interested in a career in LE. As a lot of you know one of the most common questions on this site is about ones past. Before a lot of you come down on me with some of the same repugnant answers that I have read let me share with you what I have found. I have read all the threads on this site and others about previous "street" experience and past drug use banning you from any employment with any LE agency. I have spoke with a lot of policemen and others involved with LE. I have found in my research that its not so clear cut as it may seem or as a lot of the old timers make it out to be. I guess the new term is "life experience". I have heard this term used frequently. I feel a lot of the old timers can't and won't accept the fact that the war on drugs is a losing one and that agencies are scrambling to find recruits -especially if they have to hire out a tainted pool. It seems to me a change in policy towards past drug is already in place. If LE hired people with real life experience vs. cookie cutter candidates with NO life experience this could possibly be a good thing. No amount of training can prepare you for the streets. If everyone you dealt with as a police officer is as dumb and drugged out as a lot of you think it would be an easy job- but its not. To be a criminal is very stupid but a lot of criminals are smart. Personally I would want someone on my side with some street experience rather than someone who has only "read" about it or learned from someone else. Though LE is held to a much higher standard than any other career I believe that most people would rather have someone with real world experience rather than a textbook take on it all. From all this research and speaking with people I have come to this conclusion. As long as you know in your heart where you are in life and you go in to your interviews telling the whole truth and nothing else you should be alright. To all those in LE already.....what do you think?

[DeltaV]

"Life experience" means that a candidate is older, might have had more jobs, or maybe did a stint in the military. Basically it means that they have something to offer other than being straight out of college.

Prior illegal behavior doesn't count as "life experience." If I were sitting on the oral board where a candidate tried to tout their past as a drug abusing delinquent as "life experience," they would be laughed out of the room. That's not life experience, that's disregarding the law. There's a difference.

Make no mistake about it, the best agencies don't have any shortage of qualified applicants or a dwindling applicant pool. We make people with shady pasts and criminal "life experience" informants, not officers.

Bad choices in your past are things you have to overcome with superior qualifications, they aren't marks in your favor. Contrary to what some Hollywood productions might lead you to believe, it doesn't take a criminal to catch a criminal.

[Samuel]

This is my first post on this site and I must admit its a great resource for anyone interested in a career in LE. As a lot of you know one of the most common questions on this site is about ones past. Before a lot of you come down on me with some of the same repugnant answers that I have read let me share with you what I have found. I have read all the threads on this site and others about previous "street" experience and past drug use banning you from any employment with any LE agency. I have spoke with a lot of policemen and others involved with LE. I have found in my research that its not so clear cut as it may seem or as a lot of the old timers make it out to be. I guess the new term is "life experience". I have heard this term used frequently. I feel a lot of the old timers can't and won't accept the fact that the war on drugs is a losing one and that agencies are scrambling to find recruits -especially if they have to hire out a tainted pool. It seems to me a change in policy towards past drug is already in place. If LE hired people with real life experience vs. cookie cutter candidates with NO life experience this could possibly be a good thing. No amount of training can prepare you for the streets. If everyone you dealt with as a police officer is as dumb and drugged out as a lot of you think it would be an easy job- but its not. To be a criminal is very stupid but a lot of criminals are smart. Personally I would want someone on my side with some street experience rather than someone who has only "read" about it or learned from someone else. Though LE is held to a much higher standard than any other career I believe that most people would rather have someone with real world experience rather than a textbook take on it all. From all this research and speaking with people I have come to this conclusion. As long as you know in your heart where you are in life and you go in to your interviews telling the whole truth and nothing else you should be alright. To all those in LE already.....what do you think?

Please share a few "answers that you've read" that you would consider "repugnant" :confused:

IMO, anyone who is willing to phrase or supports the phrasing of a criminal history/past as "life experience" for the purposes of LE hiring qualifications has screwed up values and is someone I would hate to see anywhere near on the job...

[Citicop]

I have news for you.

"Life Experience" does not equal "criminal experience" or "drug experience."

Hiring a candidate with "Life Experience" means hiring someone older who has worked and existed in the real world outside of just college.

Let me share what *I* have found, working in Law Enforcement and sitting on hiring boards and being a Field Training Officer.

There are no departments I am aware of that have relaxed their requirements to any real extent, let alone ACTIVELY recruiting people with checkered pasts to be cops.

Sorry to give you a "repugnant answer" but that is just the way the world really works. Your past choices have effects on your future options.

Citicop.

[ClimbingHard]

Thanks for your replies. First off I would never tout that kind of stuff as life experience in an interview or during a BI. The life experience thing was what I was told by LE. Your guys version of "life experience" seems warped to me. I have read responses on other threads saying if you have done drugs once your out.....yada yada. Or the good ole' go apply at McDonalds when your done applying for the police force response. Classic. I am not going to go back through all the threads and quote every one. You guys are smart.....you know what I am talking about. I believe life experience is the situations you have encountered in the past and how you have learned from them or survived them. I would say outside of military experience all these "perfect" cookie cutter candidates really are text book riders. The biggest dumb *** in the country can have a lot of life experience but its the quality and depth of those experiences that I understand to be valuable even if it was illegal. I respect your brutal honesty but like I said its not as clear cut as you all make it out to be. I was told by one agency its a case by case basis. Also a lot of police departments do not publicly disclose what exactly will DQ you when it comes to prior drug use/illegal activity. I don't buy it that all these major cities have police numbers in the thousands yet no one has done drugs? I have also heard the response as well you must have been good if you didn't get caught. I have a perfect record, great credit history, good education and am a superior athlete. On paper I am a model citizen and always have been. Off the record I have been a model citizen for years. Also everything I have read and been told is that LE is hurting for new recruits. Who the hell wants to get shot at for 50k a year? Its not exactly a high paying career. It takes a drive and passion to want to work in public service. To me it seems like its a closed door policy on a case by case basis. BTW, not trying to be an a-hole but the Hollywood thing about being a criminal to catch a criminal.............if some of the officers out there actually had some real life experience maybe they would be catching more criminals.

[Citicop]

Thanks for your replies. First off I would never tout that kind of stuff as life experience in an interview or during a BI. The life experience thing was what I was told by LE. Your guys version of "life experience" seems warped to me. I have read responses on other threads saying if you have done drugs once your out.....yada yada. Or the good ole' go apply at McDonalds when your done applying for the police force response. Classic. I am not going to go back through all the threads and quote every one. You guys are smart.....you know what I am talking about. I believe life experience is the situations you have encountered in the past and how you have learned from them or survived them. I would say outside of military experience all these "perfect" cookie cutter candidates really are text book riders. The biggest dumb *** in the country can have a lot of life experience but its the quality and depth of those experiences that I understand to be valuable even if it was illegal. I respect your brutal honesty but like I said its not as clear cut as you all make it out to be. I was told by one agency its a case by case basis. Also a lot of police departments do not publicly disclose what exactly will DQ you when it comes to prior drug use/illegal activity. I don't buy it that all these major cities have police numbers in the thousands yet no one has done drugs? I have also heard the response as well you must have been good if you didn't get caught. I have a perfect record, great credit history, good education and am a superior athlete. On paper I am a model citizen and always have been. Off the record I have been a model citizen for years. Also everything I have read and been told is that LE is hurting for new recruits. Who the hell wants to get shot at for 50k a year? Its not exactly a high paying career. It takes a drive and passion to want to work in public service. To me it seems like its a closed door policy on a case by case basis. BTW, not trying to be an a-hole but the Hollywood thing about being a criminal to catch a criminal............if some of the officers out there actually had some real life experience maybe they would be catching more criminals.

Nice attitude based on your extensive Law Enforcement Experience.

Let me explain something to you. We ARE cops. We have done and continue to do the job. We know what it takes to get hired, we know what it takes to succeed in the field.

You think you can be the star of some modern version of The Mod Squad, then go ahead. Get hired, get verified, and prove us wrong. Once you do, you can show us all how to do our jobs, which you assume you can do better than us based on your extensive "Life Experience."

You'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath. No one I have ever issued the above challenge to has ever come back and done it.

The parts of your post that I highlighted are telling enough; if your past doesn't keep you out, your attitude will.

Citicop.

[mobrien316]

To all those in LE already.....what do you think?

I think you are trying to convince yourself of something.

I disagree that former drug addicts make better cops than people who were smart enough to avoid the habitual smoking, snorting, or injecting of various chemicals in order to alter their mental status.

As already stated, "life experience" for a police applicant is someone who has several years in the military, or who has started another career already, or similar experiences. It does not mean we look for applicants who chose to disregard the law and now try to justify their decision by claiming the war on drugs is unwinnable and therefore moot.

Perhaps you could apply to be a pharmacist. Your life experience might actually help you with that.

[mcsap]

So what drugs have you done and what crimes have you committed that you think give you " life experience ?"

[SnapShawt]

So if you kill someone, or steal something, or vandalize some property, this should OBVIOUSLY qualify you as a prime candidate right? I mean, after all, you would know what it takes to catch a killer/thief/vandal given the "life experience" you would gain by doing it! Why limit "life experience" to drug usage?

It's not OUR views that are warped buddy. Have fun with that rationalizing thing you've got going.

[puma2]

ClimbingHard,

I understand the point that you are trying to make: if Joe has bought drugs before and has had contact with criminals, then Joe can easily "act the part" in doing undercover work, buy-busts, etc... If you could find a truly reformed individual with some of that experience, it could be a bonus.

However, you have to look at the bigger picture. It is going to take a lot of time and other experiences to prove that Joe is truly reformed. If Joe was a user, the department hiring him needs to be reasonably sure he will not be tempted to use again. That can be a difficult bar to pass.

Furthermore, although Joe may have more street experience than someone else, such street experience can be learned. Integrity is harder to learn. Most people have it or they don't.

Finally, as was previously said, police usually use people with criminal experience as informants. It is much less risky than hiring them.

[JCP1976]

I can tell you that in the state of AZ, no agency within the Phoenix metropolitan area (6 PD departments and sherriff) are NOT suffering for candidates. I have applied at several agencies and there were over 100 applicants at each, and the exam is held monthly. That is over 1200 applicants yearly to fill 5-50 positions, depending on the department. As an applicant with no "life experience" as you say, it should be easy for me to get a job as a cop, right? Well that is wrong. I have been rejected from one place already and am just a number in a long line of applicants at the current department I am applying for.

[Stub]

To all those in LE already.....what do you think?

I think cookie cutter candidates have real life experiences.

You associated cookie cutter candidates with the following terms:

"...with NO life experience..."
"...someone who has only "read" about it..."
"...learned from someone else."
"...a textbook take on it all."
"...are text book riders."

Then go on to state:

...if some of the officers out there actually had some real life experience maybe they would be catching more criminals.

Are you suggesting that "real life experience" equates to previously engaging in criminal activity?

I believe life experience is the situations you have encountered in the past and how you have learned from them or survived them.

Everyone has life experience, some are more marketable than others.



...and BTW, I definitely would not meet your definition of a cookie cutter candidate.

[ClimbingHard]

Again thanks for your replies. Citicop I understand and hopefully one day I will be able to come back and join you all in more dialogue as a LEO. Trust me I am on your side. I have a young son that I don't want to go down the same road I did when I was younger. I have a stake in this. I am not challenging you by any means. I know you guys are all LE and I am not. I am trying to figure out all the contradictions in this one particular area of the application process.

I am not going to disclose my prior activities on here. I am not some former addict, street thug or whatever you guys want to think. I do have past military experience as well. I have an impeccable record and that's that. Already done one BI with the military. My BI will be disclosed all that information......and I still believe honesty is the best policy.

At least one person on here somewhat understands what I am trying to say (Puma). I understand integrity, honesty, respect are all things you have to earn through your actions. I equate life experience to the same thing as getting your *** kicked for the first time or losing for the first time. Your never going to know unless you have been on the other side. The pendulum of life does not stay on one side. Bad experiences are experiences never the less and are very valuable.

The front page of this site talks about a model LEO and how he is now robbing banks. You hear all the time about LEO's getting busted for all types of criminal activity. You think curiosity killed the cat since they didn't know any better? Maybe since they think they can actually get away with it? I have seen the tragedy of criminal activities so I know better. Again....tens of thousands of LEO's in all these metro areas and not one has any prior drug use/illegal activity?

[CelticSmackdown]

Paragraphs...please, if you have any shred of mercy....Paragraphs. My eyes are crossed. :-)

[ClimbingHard]

Sorry CelticSmackDown-LOL. Are you a real Scot?