New cop has a past, is he a liability?

[fullrearview]

There could be several reasons for an Administrative Discharge and not all of them are for negative content.

Exactly. Mine is listed as, "Uncharaterized." Medical condition Existing Prior To Service or, "EPTS."

Kinda crappy, since it took 4 months to go through the waiver process, only to be discharged for a pulled groin muscle.....Funny thing was, it took them so long to do the paperwork, it healed and I still did everything everyone else did right up to AIT.

It was a blessing, and a curse....Lost my dad shortly after, and my mom not too much after that so I was home for it.

[bubbagump]

Background Investigations...Polygraphs...Interviews...Tests.. .Acadamies...

But you NEVER know what you are really going to get.

I've known officers who were honorably discharged, special forces, college educated, clean background, top of their class, etc...that turned around and did scandolous sh*t.

Then you have guys who barely graduated high school, didn't go to college, no military, no fancy stuff, maybe some background...and they were good police officers.

My .02

[TRICKSTER]

Sounds cool. Not too worried about the discharge thing. Only that the guy committed a "violent" act. Just wondering if stuff like that has ever come back to haunt depts.

"Violent" act committed by a serviceman? What do you think happens in a combat zone, peace and love? What do you think happens in police work? It's a "violent" job at times. You admit that you don't know the details so what's the real issue here?
If it's that important to you take it up with his department. If your not willing to do that, let it go.

[Notorious]

We don't need to be typical Californians and try and eliminate every liability through more intrusion into people's private lives or through more government oversight.

Hmmm... not to nitpick this point, Wes... but isn't your thread about people asking for "legal advice" in the LEO forum kinda the same thing where you are seeking to eliminate or reduce potential criminal liability and then also to intrude into people's lives by having their posts removed involuntarily to the 2A forum or the FFL forum?

I mean, if someone wants to blurt his business online to others and ask for advice from people he doesn't know, and then post it in the LEO forum... that's his business, no?

Just sayin....

[tenpercentfirearms]

Hmmm... not to nitpick this point, Wes... but isn't your thread about people asking for "legal advice" in the LEO forum kinda the same thing where you are seeking to eliminate or reduce potential criminal liability and then also to intrude into people's lives by having their posts removed involuntarily to the 2A forum or the FFL forum?

I mean, if someone wants to blurt his business online to others and ask for advice from people he doesn't know, and then post it in the LEO forum... that's his business, no?

Just sayin....

It would be if this forum was private. However, this forum is far from private and quite public.

Second of all, it is my belief that many people who come on here think there is some anonymousness to Calguns. They might also think talking to the police for legal advice is a great idea. They might start asking questions that gets them in trouble. I feel it is our duty to warn them about doing such things. In the end, we can't stop it and they will have to learn.

I am not quite sure how that ties in to a guy coming on here being worried that a police officer was discharged for a violent act in the military an unknown number of years ago and my telling him to not worry about it. My concern in the other thread is actually for people who might have broken firearms laws and not realize it. This thread is about a man who has done nothing wrong, but another man is concerned he *might* do something wrong in the future.

And again, the other thread really has nothing to do with the LEOs on this board who I generally trust to give good advice (as long as they are not on a witch hunt into previous posts while giving no advice). It has to do with people increasing their very real criminal legal exposure through the Internet.

Hey don't believe me, do a Google search for Matt Corwin. Even though he didn't ask for legal advice, he just shot his AK on Myspace.

Sounds cool. Not too worried about the discharge thing. Only that the guy committed a "violent" act. Just wondering if stuff like that has ever come back to haunt depts.

Anyway, back to this thread. I am sure there are many things that come back to haunt departments. We are dealing with human beings. You can vet them as much as you want and they will still make mistakes or even just be plain evil. You might worry about a guy and he will be a great officer. You just never know.

And that is why there is insurance. For paying for the screw ups that should have known better.

[Notorious]

It would be if this forum was private. However, this forum is far from private and quite public.

Second of all, it is my belief that many people who come on here think there is some anonymousness to Calguns. They might also think talking to the police for legal advice is a great idea. They might start asking questions that gets them in trouble. I feel it is our duty to warn them about doing such things. In the end, we can't stop it and they will have to learn.

I am not quite sure how that ties in to a guy coming on here being worried that a police officer was discharged for a violent act in the military an unknown number of years ago and my telling him to not worry about it. My concern in the other thread is actually for people who might have broken firearms laws and not realize it. This thread is about a man who has done nothing wrong, but another man is concerned he *might* do something wrong in the future.

And again, the other thread really has nothing to do with the LEOs on this board who I generally trust to give good advice (as long as they are not on a witch hunt into previous posts while giving no advice). It has to do with people increasing their very real criminal legal exposure through the Internet.

Hey don't believe me, do a Google search for Matt Corwin. Even though he didn't ask for legal advice, he just shot his AK on Myspace.

Like I said... I'm just wondering how far we are going to take this nanny state thing where we have to protect people from themselves. Your concern is that this guy shouldn't worry about preventing other people's liability, same as you are doing with those seeking legal advice from LEO's.

The facts might be dissimilar and all, but the overall statement that you made which I quoted sounded pretty similar to what your concern was in the LEO legal advice thread.

I'm not picking a fight with you, Wes. I have great respect for you and what you did for the CA firearms rights, but I just think that you may try to protect people from themselves too much.

I highlighted your quote that talks about "duty". Whose duty is this? Is this even a duty that is owed? Would this duty, if it exists, fall to the mods instead of members, no matter how senior? Are we self-appointing to become semi-mods and liability police to those we think might not know what we think they should know?

[Subotai]

"Violent" act committed by a serviceman? What do you think happens in a combat zone, peace and love? What do you think happens in police work? It's a "violent" job at times. You admit that you don't know the details so what's the real issue here?
If it's that important to you take it up with his department. If your not willing to do that, let it go.

Oh I know exactly what happened. I can't say here. He committed a violent crime. He was kicked out of the service. I just think the guy might be a liability and wanted the opinion of current police officers. That's the only purpose of this thread.

[yzErnie]

Oh I know exactly what happened. I can't say here. He committed a violent crime. He was kicked out of the service. I just think the guy might be a liability and wanted the opinion of current police officers. That's the only purpose of this thread.

Apparently, it was not a serious enough offense to keep him from getting hired. The responsibility falls on his shoulders to keep himself out of trouble and if that doesn't happen he has no one to blame but himself.

[TRICKSTER]

So which is it, you know the details, you don't know the details?
This is starting to sound like a bunch of B.S. just meant to stir the pot.

I really don't want to say more, in case some people here works at his dept., etc. I don't want to get him in trouble, just curious. I know he seriously jacked someone up, but don't know the details other than he got in trouble.

Oh I know exactly what happened. I can't say here. He committed a violent crime. He was kicked out of the service. I just think the guy might be a liability and wanted the opinion of current police officers. That's the only purpose of this thread.

[Subotai]

So which is it, you know the details, you don't know the details?
This is starting to sound like a bunch of B.S. just meant to stir the pot.

What did I just say? Sounds like you're trying to stir this pot. If I wanted to out the guy, I'd do it on his dept. billboard. Sounds like you are extremely sensitive to anyone saying anything bad about cops.

[TRICKSTER]

What did I just say?

Which time, you made two contradictory statements.

[Subotai]

Which time, you made two contradictory statements.

The first statement was designed to protect the issue as much as possible so I don't accidently out the guy. The second statement contained more information as I was attacked and needed to clarify, needlessly in my opinion.

[TRICKSTER]

Whatever, still a pointless discussion with contradictory statement on your part. Goodbye.

[SVT-40]

Oh I know exactly what happened. I can't say here. He committed a violent crime. He was kicked out of the service. I just think the guy might be a liability and wanted the opinion of current police officers. That's the only purpose of this thread.

So if you think he is a that much of a liability then do "the right thing" and march into his PD and make a complaint. Let his department sort it out.

It's that simple.

Since you know all about it you are the one who needs to make your own decision.

No one here has any relevant info so any advice given here is useless.

[center_x]

Frankm, I think you kinda already know the answer to your question. If you're past LE, you know the steps it takes to get hired. Remember if you didn't hire him, he's probably not your liability.

People do change. Whatever this person did was in the past. If he shows signs of revisiting his past, then maybe you should react. Until then, let things be?