Will my answer to this question DQ me? =[

[xterra4]

"Have you ever hit or physically overpowered a spouse or romantic partner?"

I would have to answer yes to this question =[ Wondering if it will be an automatic DQ? I am a 23 year old female applying for a dispatch position in CA and this question is in the BG packet. I have never been in trouble with the law but I would have to admit I have lightlty hit/shoved my husband if we were in an arguement. (I am still going to answer yes no matter what your answers are, but I would like to be realistic about the outcome before I go in to meet with the LT) I am very embarrassed by this, just please let me know your opinions on the DQ

[Kimble]

"Have you ever hit or physically overpowered a spouse or romantic partner?"

I would have to answer yes to this question =[ Wondering if it will be an automatic DQ? I am a 23 year old female applying for a dispatch position in CA and this question is in the BG packet. I have never been in trouble with the law but I would have to admit I have lightlty hit/shoved my husband if we were in an arguement. (I am still going to answer yes no matter what your answers are, but I would like to be realistic about the outcome before I go in to meet with the LT) I am very embarrassed by this, just please let me know your opinions on the DQ

Ultimately whether that response gets you DQ'ed or not is up to the agency you apply to, but the fact you've resorted to physical violence as an adult (even if only "lightly hitting/shoving") is of some concern. Also, what you define as "light hitting" or "light shoving" may not be seen as such my the agency you apply to, they may see it as more serious, depending on the specifics.

[retdetsgt]

I would be surprised if that kept you from getting a dispatch job unless you went to jail for it.

[G35 Mass]

I highly respect the two members who have posted above me, and they're highly regarded by the mass on this forum. That said, I'm going to greatly dissent from their opinion.

My opinion: Perpetrators of domestic violence, regardless how slight, have no business working in law enforcement in any capacity. I don't care if you carry a gun and have arrest powers or run a desk and phone. When you do get locked up for slugging your husband, it WILL hit the news. I have worked for a police department who's image was incredibly tarnished due to one employees non-violent off-duty criminal act. I don't want to work along side someone who might bring that to my department again.

If you think for a moment that what you do is OK and it's not domestic violence, you need to consider a checkup from the neck-up.... I have zero tolerance for D/V. It angers me beyond belief.

[xterra4]

I highly respect the two members who have posted above me, and they're highly regarded by the mass on this forum. That said, I'm going to greatly dissent from their opinion.

My opinion: Perpetrators of domestic violence, regardless how slight, have no business working in law enforcement in any capacity. I don't care if you carry a gun and have arrest powers or run a desk and phone. When you do get locked up for slugging your husband, it WILL hit the news. I have worked for a police department who's image was incredibly tarnished due to one employees non-violent off-duty criminal act. I don't want to work along side someone who might bring that to my department again.

If you think for a moment that what you do is OK and it's not domestic violence, you need to consider a checkup from the neck-up.... I have zero tolerance for D/V. It angers me beyond belief.

First off, I have never “slugged” my husband. What I said when I have “lightly hit/shoved” him, was true. Not going to play the victim card, just give some background. When I was a child I was verbally/physically abused. So, when somebody is too close to me or in my face, I take a step back. If my back was against a wall, I have shoved past my husband or hit him in his shoulder so he would take a step back from me. I have never done this with the intent to harm or injure him, this has been done out of instinct. I am not saying this is right (like I have said I was embarrassed). Humans cannot always control their instincts, whether they are right or wrong. I am not trying to make an excuse, just give some explanation of why I have chosen certain actions in the past.

[marinepilot]

First off, I have never “slugged” my husband. What I said when I have “lightly hit/shoved” him, was true. Not going to play the victim card, just give some background. When I was a child I was verbally/physically abused. So, when somebody is too close to me or in my face, I take a step back. If my back was against a wall, I have shoved past my husband or hit him in his shoulder so he would take a step back from me. I have never done this with the intent to harm or injure him, this has been done out of instinct. I am not saying this is right (like I have said I was embarrassed). Humans cannot always control their instincts, whether they are right or wrong. I am not trying to make an excuse, just give some explanation of why I have chosen certain actions in the past.

While I understand you're just trying to explain certain actions you've taken in the past, saying that humans can't always control their instincts sounds, to me, like a cheap excuse. You have your explanation and that's great, you can give that to the investigator when he/she asks you about your positive answer. Who knows, they may even buy it. But if you go in there spouting off about how we can't always control our instincts because we're human, I almost guarantee you're not going to be getting a job offer. In this field (Law Enforcement) they want people who CAN control their instincts all the time! If you just go off and act on your instinct in certain situations, you'd be doing a great injustice.

For example, I once responded to a shooting victim who was a 19 year old mother of a 2 year old son, shot in the face. The person who called gave a story that was thinner than toilet paper and was easily seen thru when you looked at how she was laid out and where the bullet was found. My INSTINCT was to beat the guy senseless for shooting his girlfriend in the face (she later died of her wounds). That, to me, would have been "justice". (He eventually ended up getting out of the murder charge and convicted of a being a felon in possession of a firearm. He'll be out and back on the streets in less than 3 years.) So, had I acted on my INSTINCT in that situation, 1) he would have never been able to even be arrested, 2) I would have lost my job, 3) I would have been arrested, and 4) I would be serving time in prison because I abused my position of public trust (even though I bet most people, had they seen that girl lying there in a pool of her own blood and brains would have liked to have done the same thing or worse).

I'm sorry for your past, especially if it is still affecting you to the point where you can't control yourself in certain situations. I suggest getting therapy to help. But as much as you try to explain it away, there are certain things that just CAN NOT be allowed when you wish to work in this field, as the liability would be way too high.

I wish you luck in your future. Let us know how things turn out.

[MikeG]

First off, I have never “slugged” my husband. What I said when I have “lightly hit/shoved” him, was true. Not going to play the victim card, just give some background. When I was a child I was verbally/physically abused. So, when somebody is too close to me or in my face, I take a step back. If my back was against a wall, I have shoved past my husband or hit him in his shoulder so he would take a step back from me. I have never done this with the intent to harm or injure him, this has been done out of instinct. I am not saying this is right (like I have said I was embarrassed). Humans cannot always control their instincts, whether they are right or wrong. I am not trying to make an excuse, just give some explanation of why I have chosen certain actions in the past.

Not a LEO, but I'm curious as to the nature of this. It seems to me to be profoundly different circumstances to use force to escape being physically threatened or intimidated (i.e. back against the wall and still other person is being aggressive when you have already tried to escape the encounter). Compared with striking out in anger or rage.

If someone kept coming at me aggressively and I kept backing away until my back was against a wall, I think I would probably use the minimum amount of force necessary to escape or stop the aggression. Slipping by and bumping shoulders might be a side effect of that. That doesn't seem unreasonable to me. It's incidental to minimizing a threatening and intimidating act.

If your justification was you felt threatened and intimidate at that instant, it sounds reasonable to me. If your justification was you didn't like what happened as a kid and you lashed out, not very reasonable.

I suspect very few police officers would allow an aggressive person get up in their personal space, and after a warning, not take physical action to stop it. It's reasonable to do that and I don't think they wait for a swing before they protect themselves.

[xterra4]

While I understand you're just trying to explain certain actions you've taken in the past, saying that humans can't always control their instincts sounds, to me, like a cheap excuse. You have your explanation and that's great, you can give that to the investigator when he/she asks you about your positive answer. Who knows, they may even buy it. But if you go in there spouting off about how we can't always control our instincts because we're human, I almost guarantee you're not going to be getting a job offer. In this field (Law Enforcement) they want people who CAN control their instincts all the time! If you just go off and act on your instinct in certain situations, you'd be doing a great injustice.

For example, I once responded to a shooting victim who was a 19 year old mother of a 2 year old son, shot in the face. The person who called gave a story that was thinner than toilet paper and was easily seen thru when you looked at how she was laid out and where the bullet was found. My INSTINCT was to beat the guy senseless for shooting his girlfriend in the face (she later died of her wounds). That, to me, would have been "justice". (He eventually ended up getting out of the murder charge and convicted of a being a felon in possession of a firearm. He'll be out and back on the streets in less than 3 years.) So, had I acted on my INSTINCT in that situation, 1) he would have never been able to even be arrested, 2) I would have lost my job, 3) I would have been arrested, and 4) I would be serving time in prison because I abused my position of public trust (even though I bet most people, had they seen that girl lying there in a pool of her own blood and brains would have liked to have done the same thing or worse).

I'm sorry for your past, especially if it is still affecting you to the point where you can't control yourself in certain situations. I suggest getting therapy to help. But as much as you try to explain it away, there are certain things that just CAN NOT be allowed when you wish to work in this field, as the liability would be way too high.

I wish you luck in your future. Let us know how things turn out.

Thank you. And you are right, I worded that wrong. I have had other instances at my place of work where I have had angry people in my face yelling and I have handled the situation calmly. I guess I was just kind of overly sensitive after hearing "Perpetrators of domestic violence..." It made me feel like I was being portrayed as some lady that beats on her husband, which has never been the case. Either way, I know I am not right and that wasn't my point. Anyway, I am just digging my self in a hole here. Just didn't want it to sound like I have a bad day at work and come home and beat on someone.

[G35 Mass]

I find it "interesting" that your story went from light hit/shove to light hit/shove in self-defense when I called you out for committing acts of domestic violence.

By "interesting", I really mean "B.S.".

You tried minimizing your story with the "light" qualifier, and further minimize it by now saying its in self-defense.

[xterra4]

I find it "interesting" that your story went from light hit/shove to light hit/shove in self-defense when I called you out for committing acts of domestic violence.

By "interesting", I really mean "B.S.".

You tried minimizing your story with the "light" qualifier, and further minimize it by now saying its in self-defense.

That's fine. But I didn't go into a long story on the first post because I wanted to see how it was looked at on the face of the issue, which is how it will be looked at by the BI.( just like a DUI is a DUI whether you knew you were over the limit or not.) And no, i never said self-defense. I just said it was to get out of a situtation which to me isn't quite the same. (??) "If my back was against a wall, I have shoved past my husband or hit him in his shoulder so he would take a step back from me" That is light hitting/shoving. The story has not changed. But, it really doesn't matter what you believe because I know what is true. I have never hurt my husband, and he has never hurt me. But, like i have said, I've shoved past him/hit him in the shoulder to get him to take a step back from me. To me that isn't he same as "slugging" someone out of anger and fury. Not saying it is right, just not exactly the same.

[1811_bound]

That's fine. But I didn't go into a long story on the first post because I wanted to see how it was looked at on the face of the issue, which is how it will be looked at by the BI.( just like a DUI is a DUI whether you knew you were over the limit or not.) And no, i never said self-defense. I just said it was to get out of a situtation which to me isn't quite the same. (??) "If my back was against a wall, I have shoved past my husband or hit him in his shoulder so he would take a step back from me" That is light hitting/shoving. The story has not changed. But, it really doesn't matter what you believe because I know what is true. I have never hurt my husband, and he has never hurt me. But, like i have said, I've shoved past him/hit him in the shoulder to get him to take a step back from me. To me that isn't he same as "slugging" someone out of anger and fury. Not saying it is right, just not exactly the same.

Introducing a gun to a relationship that can get physical is probably a bigger problem than figuring out who hit who and who started it. That's how I would look at it.

[ChesCopPodz]

Well, I know for a fact that you can get hired even admitting it.

A friend of mine at my old department was hired, even after admitting that he had backhanded his wife one time. She cheated on him, he confronted her, he said something that resulted in her slapping him, he backhand slapped her immediately after.

I don't condone it. Had I known it when I met them, we may not have become friends, and our friendship almost ended when I found out. I don't think he SHOULD have been hired. It may speak to my old agencies hiring standards, except that he was one of the best at the job that I've worked with. He came over as a lateral transfer, so it wouldn't surprise me if they overlooked it due to his work.

[1811_bound]

Well, I know for a fact that you can get hired even admitting it.

A friend of mine at my old department was hired, even after admitting that he had backhanded his wife one time. She cheated on him, he confronted her, he said something that resulted in her slapping him, he backhand slapped her immediately after.

I don't condone it. Had I known it when I met them, we may not have become friends, and our friendship almost ended when I found out. I don't think he SHOULD have been hired. It may speak to my old agencies hiring standards, except that he was one of the best at the job that I've worked with. He came over as a lateral transfer, so it wouldn't surprise me if they overlooked it due to his work.

Guess sometimes the pimp hand has to be used.

[MPI1]

Guess sometimes the pimp hand has to be used.

Your posts on this thread have been "uninteresting" at best. You said something about a gun in one post and there wasn't a SINGLE mention of a gun in this entire thread. Your red status bar must mean that there have been quite a few posts that were this moronic in the past. I don't have the patients to read through them all so I am just going to assume. Please stop posting you are making us all stupider (yes that was said on purpose)!

[1811_bound]

Your posts on this thread have been "uninteresting" at best. You said something about a gun in one post and there wasn't a SINGLE mention of a gun in this entire thread. Your red status bar must mean that there have been quite a few posts that were this moronic in the past. I don't have the patients to read through them all so I am just going to assume. Please stop posting you are making us all stupider (yes that was said on purpose)!

A law enforcement dispatcher doesn't carry a firearm? Well I wish I was as all knowing as you clearly are. Assume what you want...but you misspelled patience...so if I'm a moron...what are you.