PDA

View Full Version : Do I have too many guns to get hired by an LE agency?


Josh
05-17-2005, 5:56 PM
Im in the process of applying for a LE agency.

I have 3 handguns and 5 longarms (1 shotgun, 2 bolt actions and 2 semis) all legal, does this look "bad?"

My friend just told me some guy was denied because he was an NRA memeber and had too many guns. He was seen as a gun nut and turned down.

Ive got a very clean past, never even tried an illegal drug, dont drink and only 1 ticket ever.

can anyone with experience chime in on this please.

Someone also said they wont believe that I dont drink or have never tried an illegal drug especially since im young (21).

Trader Jack
05-17-2005, 6:05 PM
Josh; Don't listen to those know it alls who know nothing at all.

Just do your thing and apply to whom ever. Don't tell them you have those guns unless they ask. As for NRA membership, t5here are a lot of police officers who belong.

What agency are you thinking of?

LongBch_SigP226
05-17-2005, 6:30 PM
I'm not a LEO nor have I applied for the position but owning firearms shouldn't be a problem. I guess you have to be careful during the interview process. Make sure you don't mention anything about firearms during the interview unless specifically asked to do so. If the word "gun" or "firearm" comes up in your answer to the questions asked, you might have some serious issues, probably unfit to be a cop. If you don't have valid reason (helping people, reducing crimes, protecting citizens, working for the government, etc.) for becoming a cop then expect to be rejected. They don't want trigger happy folks or gun aficionados.

Remember you are there to serve and protect. Using your gun is the last thing you want to do. You should instinctively talk it out, call for back up, use non-lethal method, etc. Don't say you are becoming a cop because you enjoy shooting guns and you are good at it. Don't say you know so much about guns that you can write a book on it. Don't say you want to become a cop because of your interest in guns. Don't say you spend your entire weekend shooting guns. Just avoid talking about your guns and you'll be okay, assuming other requirements are met.

dwtt
05-17-2005, 7:09 PM
Originally posted by Josh:
Im in the process of applying for a LE agency.

I have 3 handguns and 5 longarms (1 shotgun, 2 bolt actions and 2 semis) all legal, does this look "bad?"

My friend just told me some guy was denied because he was an NRA memeber and had too many guns. He was seen as a gun nut and turned down.

Ive got a very clean past, never even tried an illegal drug, dont drink and only 1 ticket ever.

can anyone with experience chime in on this please.

Someone also said they wont believe that I dont drink or have never tried an illegal drug especially since im young (21).

I don't think your collection comes close to an arsenal able to get you disqualified. They seem to care more about your disposition and sanity. I do know from some police in my Marine Corps reserve unit a long time ago that military experience counts for a lot. Marine Corps infantry would get more brownie points than,say, being a machinist in the Air Force, but on paper they give the same consideration to all the branches.

trempel_ry@yahoo.com
05-17-2005, 9:34 PM
Depends on the agency, the officer assigned to do your background and you.
You might be unlucky and get stuck with a background officer who is of the opinion that only cops should have guns. Such cops are fairly rare though.
On the other hand if you look like guns are your only hobby in life, that's a big negative. On your interview, when asked what qualities you posess that would make you a good cop, don't say "I can shoot well", or something along those lines. If they ask you why you own firearms, don't become too preachy. Don't start going off about your rights and infringements and self-defense, etc. You're not there to promote political change, you're there looking for a job. Don't make them think that you're have some sort of a hidden agenda.
Guns are just one of many tools that cops use every day. Luckily, they're seldom used. Being fixated on the gun that sits in a cop's holster is like being fixated on his can of pepper spray, his radio or his handcuffs.

Josh
05-17-2005, 11:29 PM
Im applying for OCSD, ive already passed the tests and the interview. Now its the background stuff.

Since I am so young I have very little history and that makes it easier.

My buddie was just hired as a deputy and is now a DST and hes the one that told me, but he gets things wrong all the time or blows things out of perspective.

I know owning guns is not bad but I was worndering if it could be viewed as I have too many for my age.

Im big on do it yourself. I rebuilt my motorcycle my self and do all major maintenence on my car. I even installed a network in the house running the wiring and installing the boxes my self. I am concerned that when they see that i am the same way with firearms that I am "too" into it.

If someone saw my house right now I dont know what they would think, most of it is motorcycles and car gear and the other is gun stuff with computer gear mixed. I do ALOT of my own smithing on my guns. I am currently rebarreling and installing a USGI bolt in my polytech.

I guess I should put all those projects on hold just to be on the safe side.

My friend also made the physical agility test sound like an iron man event and that the interview was like the spanish inquisition. But even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Turbinator
05-18-2005, 6:30 AM
Originally posted by Josh:
I have 3 handguns and 5 longarms (1 shotgun, 2 bolt actions and 2 semis) all legal, does this look "bad?"

You still have a lotta years left to grow that collection. You're not done yet, are you?

Check this guy out:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=236509

Turby

bwiese
05-18-2005, 10:18 AM
Josh,

Why do you want to work for the gov't?

Too many people feeding off the Fed & State larder anyway.

Get an honest private sector job - be part of the solution, not the problem.

I have a real problem with these California cops and their million dollar pensions...

Bill Wiese
San Jose

jnojr
05-18-2005, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by Josh:
Im in the process of applying for a LE agency.

I have 3 handguns and 5 longarms (1 shotgun, 2 bolt actions and 2 semis) all legal, does this look "bad?"

My friend just told me some guy was denied because he was an NRA memeber and had too many guns. He was seen as a gun nut and turned down.


I hope that's not the case! I have 8 or 9 each of rifles and handguns. I'd have to count to be sure http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif And I'm in the hiring process now.

Is it possible that your friend "spouted off" too much about guns during an interview? Or did he put NRA on his application somewhere? If he came across as a "gun nut", I can see why most departments wouldn't want to hire. Me, I never said a word. It's irrelevant to the job.

Josh
05-18-2005, 10:28 AM
Originally posted by bwiese:
Josh,

Why do you want to work for the gov't?

Too many people feeding off the Fed & State larder anyway.

Get an honest private sector job - be part of the solution, not the problem.

I have a real problem with these California cops and their million dollar pensions...

Bill Wiese
San Jose

Dont worry about that, im still finishing school for an engineering degree (2 years left). I would just like to help some people out before I get stuck behind a desk.

jnojr, its not my friend that was turned down. One of the deputies told my friend that was just hired about this. And like I said, my friend blows alot of things out of perspective. He is the one guy that makes that old game of telephone interesting.

But he is occasionally right.

snwnme@realguns.com
05-18-2005, 8:51 PM
If I were denied because "I am in the NRA", I will bring my case to the ACLU and they will sue the pants out of them http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

05-18-2005, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by Josh:
Im in the process of applying for a LE agency.

I have 3 handguns and 5 longarms (1 shotgun, 2 bolt actions and 2 semis) all legal, does this look "bad?"

My friend just told me some guy was denied because he was an NRA memeber and had too many guns. He was seen as a gun nut and turned down.

Ive got a very clean past, never even tried an illegal drug, dont drink and only 1 ticket ever.

can anyone with experience chime in on this please.

Someone also said they wont believe that I dont drink or have never tried an illegal drug especially since im young (21).

Ya should be fine. Me on the other hand...

perry1963
05-19-2005, 9:39 AM
I applied at the LASD in 1990, i was never asked if i owned any firearms or an NRA member, as far as them beliving that you never used any drugs i got the feeling i wasn't belived, didn't matter as i was telling the truth, i was told everybody takes a polygraph but when i showed up for mine nobody else was also waiting like there were when i went for anything else so mabey it was that i wasn't belived, like i said it didn't matter as i past the polygraph and the background, by the time i finnished they weren't hiring any more deputies so i got put on a waiting list and had to do some thing over again because scores expirie, written test, interview, phase one medical, i also had to keep in contact with my background investictor if anything changed, getting a ticket, or anything that changed in my life plus i had to fax over a copy of my car reg. and proof of insurance every 3 months, i got tried of it and stopped, thus ended my application.

trempel_ry@yahoo.com
05-19-2005, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by bwiese:
Too many people feeding off the Fed & State larder anyway.

Get an honest private sector job - be part of the solution, not the problem.

I have a real problem with these California cops and their million dollar pensions...

Bill Wiese
San Jose
http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
So are you trying to suggest that working as a LEO is somehow dishonest work and part of the "problem"?
And what about these "million dollar pensions"? True, LE retirement plans are better than what most people get in the private sector. However, when you consider that many cops retire after a 25-30 year carreer of working ****ty hours, being beat up, spit on, second guessed by everyone including your superiors and (G-d forbid) shot at, it doesn't seem like that much money.

Josh
05-19-2005, 11:58 AM
I know not everyone takes the polygraph for OCSD. But I am pretty sure I will, but that dosen't bother me. I know they ask if you own guns on the preliminary background paperwork. But I dont know how much detail they go into for it.

As for asking if you are a member of the NRA, the background packet has a section to list what clubs or organisations you are a part of.

trempel_ry@yahoo.com
05-19-2005, 12:29 PM
Unless OCSD uses something different from the rest of California, the form POST 2-251 (Personal History Statement - Peace Officer) only asks - Are you now, or have your ever been a member of a criminal enterprise? If YES, indicate the group name, when, where and the circumstances.
Maybe OCSD uses some kind of a supplement, but that would be pretty seedy, IMO. Are you going to put what church/synagogue/mosque you belong to? I wouldn't.

Josh
05-19-2005, 4:31 PM
in the background packet, section 8 organisation information.
asks for any frats, professional organizations, clubs, labor organizations

then it asks yes/no member of communist party, facist/nazi

Maybe the post form youre refering is what I filled out before. There was a preliminary background packet that was then reviewed on site.

bwiese
05-19-2005, 5:02 PM
Trempel wrote:
So are you trying to suggest that working as a LEO is somehow dishonest work and part of the "problem"?

And what about these "million dollar pensions"? True, LE retirement plans are better than what most people get in the private sector. However, when you consider that many cops retire after a 25-30 year career of working ****ty hours, being beat up, spit on, second guessed by everyone including your superiors and (G-d forbid) shot at, it doesn't seem like that much money.

While some cops do work dangerous beats and have some risk, it's relatively safe. Most risk to cop is from driving/traffic accidents. Compare risks with construction and other trades, etc. and the cop (on average) has it easy.

If you're a cop in a CA metro area and you retire a tad past 50 at 90+% salary (often $70+K/yr or more), with cost-of-living adjustments built into payouts and along with overtime factored in (and have a 30year additional life expectancy after retirement) there's gotta be more than $1+ mil sitting there reserved. (Or actually, it's deficit spending and there's no reserved $$ there.)

Cops are also some of the most frequent filers for workmen's comp for even minor issues. (SFPD is particularly high.) Plus, the disability early retirement program is very abused - many of these cops should rotate into desk jobs for clerical/support work instead of retiring out on disability as they're still perfectly functional for everything but chasing bad guys.
This would reduce administrative hiring too.

Their risks are generally overstated, and the sacrifices at a minimum: it's actually a good deal for them as often, these folks can't do much else - not very literate, not that technically skilled.

Step 1 is to raise retirement age to 63-65 and as physical fitness declines or street ability reduces due to stress/injury, bring then into desk work.

Sh**ty hours? No worse than any software jockey in the valley.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

icormba
05-19-2005, 5:28 PM
Originally posted by bwiese:
these folks can't do much else - not very literate, not that technically skilled.


Sh**ty hours? No worse than any software jockey in the valley.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

Hey Bill, that's kinda a silly thing to say isn't it? I admit I'm not the most literate & I know many cops more'er literate than me http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Some of the cops I know speak more languages than me as well... not a sign of illiteracy?

Also, a buddy of mine just happened to be one of those software engineers who gave it up and became a cop.

I work with engineers all day long... I work those crappy 12-16 hour days, but I'm getting paid for them... they are not. They are working 7 days a week 12-16 hours a day making $150-200k a year. I'm working those 12-16 hour days 3/4 days a week w/overtime making half that... who's the stupid one? Sure I don't get the glory, but at least I get time off, can spend time with the woman, and can spend the money I make and still live some-what comfy (is that a word?)

I'll give up that extra 50-60k a year for a little sanity & free time any day.

p.s. my target retirement age is 50... I have a lot of other things to do in life http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

trempel_ry@yahoo.com
05-19-2005, 6:06 PM
While some cops do work dangerous beats and have some risk, it's relatively safe. Most risk to cop is from driving/traffic accidents. Compare risks with construction and other trades, etc. and the cop (on average) has it easy.
Learn something new every day.

05-19-2005, 9:58 PM
Originally posted by bwiese:

Why do you want to work for the gov't?

Too many people feeding off the Fed & State larder anyway.

A short list of folks who worked for the government for hefty sums of money:

Lazy Government Employees (http://icasualties.org/oif/US_NAMES.aspx)

...and don't worry Bill, the big money contributors (don't call them "special interests" though) that pull Arnold Schwarzenegger's puppet strings are outspending the "union special interests" eleven to one in advertising to push his ballot initiatives to help kill STRS & PERS.

link (http://arnoldwatch.org/blogs/blogs_000690.php3)

There are no conflicts of interest to be seen here...
Move along now.

bwiese
05-20-2005, 9:14 AM
Basura...

Note I didn't count military - you extended my screed to them which I didn't intend.

I am just against lifetime employment + padded pensions/early retirement for regular civil state+gov't employees. They should have the same risks/benefits as folks in private sector do. If I just get a 401K that's all they should get too.

I notice the frequent whining from gov't types that since they make less salary, they deserve these fat benefits. My refutation of this is that (1) the pension + early retirement plans essentially are a huge bump in compensation that does level things out pretty well and (2) skill sets of those in even better paid .gov jobs often make them useless in private sector except for relatively menial jobs.

Again, anyone retiring at, say 55, and getting 90+% of salary, adjusted for COLAs, with 25-35 yrs additional lifespan, plus lifetime healthcare, has more than "million dollar" pension - gotta have that much $$ around somewhere to fund that annuity.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

jnojr
05-20-2005, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by bwiese:

If you're a cop in a CA metro area and you retire a tad past 50 at 90+% salary (often $70+K/yr or more), with cost-of-living adjustments built into payouts and along with overtime factored in (and have a 30year additional life expectancy after retirement) there's gotta be more than $1+ mil sitting there reserved. (Or actually, it's deficit spending and there's no reserved $$ there.)

That'll only happen if you were hired at 20 or 21 and were on a 3% retirement. There are lots of 2.5% and 2% plans. And lots of LEOs work under a city or county retirement program, not CalPERS.

And any "deficit spending" is due to financial mismanagement or state lawmakers looting the fund... public retirement systems have contributions just like any private system. Usually, those contributions are made mostly or wholly by the agency... that's part of the compensation package. It would be no different if they "paid" that much more, and then deducted from the paycheck to make the contribution.

Cops are also some of the most frequent filers for workmen's comp for even minor issues.

There are a lot of opportunities to get hurt as a police officer.

Plus, the disability early retirement program is very abused - many of these cops should rotate into desk jobs for clerical/support work instead of retiring out on disability as they're still perfectly functional for everything but chasing bad guys.
This would reduce administrative hiring too.

A lot of departments do not have "light duty". Yes, medical retirements can be, and are, abused, but we can't get rid of them... officers need to know that if they get injured while serving the public, they won't be tossed to the curb, unable to support themselves.

Their risks are generally overstated, and the sacrifices at a minimum: it's actually a good deal for them as often, these folks can't do much else - not very literate, not that technically skilled.

While some jobs are "more dangerous" than police work, what other job requires you to be in a position where you may need to physically fight for your life every time you show up to work? Possibly against numerous, crazy, drug-addicted opponents? And where do you get the idea that police officers are "not very literate, not that technically skilled"??? Sure, there are losers, like in any walk of society. But you obviously know nothing of what being a police officer is all about. Cops do not spend all day, walking a beat, twirling their batons.

Step 1 is to raise retirement age to 63-65 and as physical fitness declines or street ability reduces due to stress/injury, bring then into desk work.

How many "desk jobs" do you expect there to be? How soon will you lament the number of "fat, old" cops who do nothing but sit behind a desk?

Police work burns a lot of people out. Many do not get to 20 years of service. After putting up with what a cop puts up with for 10, 15, 20+ years, there has to be that option of bailing out while still relatively young.

The value police officers give to society far exceeds their total compensation. Just envision our world with no police... unless you're completely brain-dead or a raving lunatic, it's easy to see that the price we pay is an absolute bargain.

Sh**ty hours? No worse than any software jockey in the valley.

Those "software jockeys" make a lot more money while sitting in an air-conditioned cubicle. And for every cop who "isn't pulling his weight", there's a programmer turning out crappy code, or working on stupid worthless products that will never do anything useful.

jnojr
05-20-2005, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by bwiese:

I am just against lifetime employment + padded pensions/early retirement for regular civil state+gov't employees.

For DMV people, office workers, bureaucrats, etc. I could not agree more. But people like police officers and firefighters put their lives on the line, literally, every day. They see things and have to do things that would leave most rocking themselves in a corner. Making sure that they will continue to keep a decent standard of living after years or decades of doing the job is the least we can do.

They should have the same risks/benefits as folks in private sector do. If I just get a 401K that's all they should get too.

Private-sector people used to get pensions, too. Nobody was calling for them to all be done away with. Except upper management looking to maximize profits.

I notice the frequent whining from gov't types that since they make less salary, they deserve these fat benefits. My refutation of this is that (1) the pension + early retirement plans essentially are a huge bump in compensation that does level things out pretty well

Exactly...

(2) skill sets of those in even better paid .gov jobs often make them useless in private sector except for relatively menial jobs.

Example(s)?

Again, anyone retiring at, say 55, and getting 90+% of salary, adjusted for COLAs, with 25-35 yrs additional lifespan, plus lifetime healthcare, has more than "million dollar" pension - gotta have that much $$ around somewhere to fund that annuity.

So, do you believe nobody should be able to get a decent retirement like that? Or do you just believe that because you don't, nobody else should?

Personally, I'm in favor of "pension reform" because the current system has been made untenable, thanks to Sacramento. Not because it's "unfair"... I believe that police and firefighters should be exempt... they should be able to serve and then get out with a guaranteed retirement because of what they have delivered. And I'll freely admit to a spot of hypocrisy in saying I hope they "reform" the system after I'm locked in... http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Josh
05-20-2005, 1:23 PM
[quote]
For DMV people, office workers, bureaucrats, etc. I could not agree more. But people like police officers and firefighters put their lives on the line, literally, every day. They see things and have to do things that would leave most rocking themselves in a corner.[quote]


Well gee Im so anxious to start now http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Anywho back on topic, thanks for putting some of my fears to rest.

edw794
05-20-2005, 9:35 PM
hello josh,

the number of guns you own and being a nra member is not a factor in your qualification for being a law enforcement officer.

best to you,

ed
retired le

05-21-2005, 7:13 PM
Originally posted by bwiese:
Basura...

Note I didn't count military - you extended my screed to them which I didn't intend.

Yet you didn't exclude them either (unless I missed it somewhere).

Regardless of that, if I weren't around on the forum, who would bust your balls on this type of stuff? Hmmmm....???
http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The point is, using the proverbial "broad brush" to paint all public employees as leech-like is an insult to many people I personally know.

05-21-2005, 7:18 PM
Originally posted by ed:

the number of guns you own and being a nra member is not a factor in your qualification for being a law enforcement officer.



I would guess that if anything other than that were true, these agencies making such decisions would be treading dangerous waters in regards to EOE laws.

If it were true and could be proven that you were not considered for any job position (not just that of a LEO) based on your affiliation in a group like the NRA or simply for your legal hobbies, than you'd have good grounds for a lawsuit.
I'd certainly raise a stink about it if it happened to me.
JMO.