ROTC Scholarships and Drug Use

Does it disqualify candidates? If there is or isn't any legal history? What about diff. types of drugs, such as marijuana, cocaine, heroin, alcohol, ecstasy, etc...? Or considering consistency of use, i.e., once or twice vs. regularly?

I've heard many conflicting stories about consequences (or lack thereof); all sorts of things about white lies or honesty-points, etc., etc.

For those that do not disqualify (if any), what are the waivers and paperwork like? Is it a big pain or disadvantage?

Thanks!

Dude, if it isn't in a police record, lie about it. If you smoked weed, just tell them you never did it. Lie as long as there is no record to prove otherwise. Now if you lie and they find something written down somewhere, then you're screwed. There's a risk. I'm sure there's plenty of F-16 pilots out there that smoked pot before they joined up.

And if it was only a once or twice experimentation thing? I dunno, it seems like a bad idea to lie about something so simple and understandable. I could imagine it in a future application of Murphy's law, with it popping up somehow, whether by polygraph or interview or whatever, ruining everyone's day. I would think it as a silly thing to screw up a career over if it's deemed to be a lie. Some have told me that experimentation is perfectly fine, whilst others have told me that even once may lead to a DQ.


Is it really not worth the (possible) waivers and whatnot to get rid of this silly issue? If any risks are to be taken, I'd rather them be over something less trivial and less crucial; preferably not risks that could end almost everything.

My step-nephew was an honor student applying to the Naval nuclear program. In the interview he disregarded the same advice given above and was dumped from the program. Don't admit to anything for which there is no proof.

Said person should SHOULD absolutely lie about smoking pot. End of story. Now if said person was a coke-head or shot up heroine, then I would ask they find another career. The military does not exist to fix mommy-daddy issues and fucked up childhoods. They have shrinks and support groups for that. If said person has a police record, they're on their own.

What if an old friend lets it out during a clearance check? Would that be something of interest during one of those interviews? I've been told that the primary interest behind these checks is related to deception and trust, so I'd still be extremely hesitant. Thanks for your time, guys.

Realize that if you follow some of the advice above, I'd make a list of everyone you smoked with and never use them for a reference on a security clearance questionaire.

If there is any government record anywhere about your drug use, you need to go apply for a job elsewhere.

If you are still or have recently been using drugs, then you need to go apply for a job elsewhere.

If some very hot chick on your high school summer vacation got naked and offered you herself and some weed and you took her up on both, lie and apply.

If the USAF seriously decided to prohibit anyone that had ever inhaled even once from joining up, there would be a serious lack of people in the Air Force right now.

What if an old friend lets it out during a clearance check? Would that be something of interest during one of those interviews? I've been told that the primary interest behind these checks is related to deception and trust, so I'd still be extremely hesitant. Thanks for your time, guys.

If it comes up, say you lied about it to look cool to your friends. Not the most honorable of excuses, but how bad do you want whatever your after?

Realize that if you follow some of the advice above, I'd make a list of everyone you smoked with and never use them for a reference on a security clearance questionaire.

Problem is that investigators ask your references for another reference and you can't control that. So only give family and church friends

...

Expedite, since you just admitted it to the whole of F-16.net...what should be your next move?

...

I'm still not completely sure why one in such a situation would be better off lying in the first place, aside from supposed examples such as Roscoe's. To challenge that, are many people that hold administrative positions in the military really so prohibitive as to bar new faces from certain programs at the hint of experimentation? I'd think one could be able to call up the people personally and explain it, and perhaps even garner a net gain of respect for the whole honesty ordeal. Most sources (outside of this website) have recommended the truth in such a situation, including ROTC instructors and recruiters. I think the problem is that both sides have a plausible amount of merit; neither has really sold the deal yet, though.

So far, what I've researched from apologists of either case:

Truth
--------
Honesty is appreciated
Not a big deal
"Morally" correct
Military doesn't want perfect people for TS clearances, they want trustworthy people, etc.
Experimentation is within limits for disqualification (?)

Lie
--------
No proof? Never happened.
Hearsay = inconsequential
Possibly save effort, possible misc. benefits
Some sources state even once warrants DQ (?)


Still looking for more opinions for research.

You're taking a perspective as someone who has NOT served and has NOT held a security clearance and has NOT seen the horrors of combat. If you lie about maybe smoking a little weed, you're doing it to put yourself in HARM'S way for your COUNTRY. Lying will ensure that you wake up on a freezing cold mountain top after two hours of sleep. Lying will put you in a position where you eat a lower quality of food that what is found in prisons and jails. Lying will allow you to jump out of airplanes at night when it's it's 36 degrees outside. Lying will put you in a position wear you're paid disproportionately low compared to a civilian counterpart. Tell the truth and you'll probably be warm, cozy, and well fed, regretting it 40 years down the road.