I am a current college student, double majoring in criminal justice and psychology. I have been in talks with a recruiter for the United States Marine Corps, my planned MOS is Military Police (becoming an Officer via PLC option.) I ran into a friend today that strongly advised against this, he claimed that civilian Police Departments were not allowed to hire MP's because military law is very different from civilian law. It sounds fishy to me, and this particular is not to be noted for his intelligence, but I wanted to follow up and do alittle research. After all, I'd rather ask a stupid question than end up being the stupid bugger who can't continue his career after leaving the Corps.

__________________
Just the opinion of a kid

I believe your friend is a bit short on actual knowledge. The civilian law enforcement agencies are full of military veterans; and you would probably get "brownie points" for prior military service.

I wouldn't give too much credence as to the differences between civilian laws and the UCMJ.

In the city I reside, there are lots of military veterans on the local PD.

And, if you have any doubts, I'm sure that local PD's would be happy to provide you with information for employment with them after your military service is complete.

It's BS. We absolutely hire military veterans and those with MP or SP experiance would get a preference with all other qualifications being equal.

__________________
- Change it back -

In my experience a lot of civilian agencies value past military LE/Security types. You will have to complete a civilian LE academy to be certified in the state where you want to work once you seperate, but you should have a leg up on the other students because of your experience. In my old AF outfit we had several reserve agents who were LE types in civilian life, and in my current civilian dept we have several former military LE types.

__________________
Keep Shootin' and check 6

It is BS. My freinds son just got out of the Marine Corps. He was in Security Forces (MP basically). He has several departments after him to join.

A great number of cops that I know are prior military. And they weren't Navy Seals either.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

I guess I must have snuck in under the radar. Most departments prefer military experience (especially Marine Corp). In my experience, they don't really care that much about your MOS. Even though I was an MP, I'd recommend someone planning on a civilian law enforcement career to pick something else. You'll get all the law enforcement training you'll need in the academy/on the job. Having a marketable skill in another field gives you more options if law enforcment doesn't work out or after you retire or for a side business. These days, MP's don't do a lot of patrol-type work. It ain't cops and robbers, it's guard duty, convoy escorts, quasi-infantry etc.

As others have said, this fellow doesn't know what he is talking about. With a 4 year degree and Military justice experience I would be looking into one of the Government agencies, BATFE, FBI, Postal Inspectors, (probably not border patrol). With the US government it is possible your military time would count for seniority. I believe it would in the Post Office.

__________________
Luke 22:36

Some state and local agencies also allow you to "purchase" credit in the retirement system for prior military service, although a lot of pension systems are undergoing changes these days so your mileage may vary.

My friend is prior Secret Service and now works for the local PD.

Something about 2008 and change.

He's much better off now. Two baby girls. They're so cute.

__________________
Dum vivo cano

Your friend is absolutly incorrect. Here is a link to the story that was in the Memphis Commercial Appeal last week. New class of Shelby County Sheriff's deputies takes ex-Marine as its president * The Commercial Appeal. I also had a customer this morning that is a captain with Memphis PD. She has been on for 19 years. Prior to going to MPD she was with the US Army as an MP stationed last at Ft. Sam in SAT.

Class III

Hmmmm.......we hire veterans, but your friend is correct in that military policing is different than civilian......similar, but different. From my understanding, there is a focus on what I was told is DL&O (Discipline, Law, & Order). We don't operate quite like that.

Most states have standards for LEOs and I don't know of a single military police certification that transfers to civilian law enforcement. You'll have to get certified in the state you live in. In my state there are similar, but different again, certifications for deputies and municipal officers.

In short, military policing may help you acquire some basic LEO skills, but in my opinion they are two different jobs.

__________________
Un-Reconstructed Southerner

Our Academy classes have many, many vets and they generally do well.

One issue is that many, maybe most, of our local agencies do not hire tobacco users and that seems, I've been told, to cull out many otherwise qualified veterans.

I'm teaching a new recruit class starting next Monday, and I will bet 25% (about) will be veterans.

Bob

When I took a police exam many years ago, I had a 5-point veteran hiring preference. I made a score in the mid-90's on the written exam, and the vet score gave me a 100 points. But some had a 10-point preference for being wounded, or something. Check your local department.

There may also be hiring quotas for some races. Maybe not officially, but I'm quite sure that many departments hire partially on a race and gender basis.

I've nver heard of a department that rejected veterans.

I have an ex-BIL whose mind "worked" that way.

You were obviously speaking to an expert. In my business we have three types of witnesses: liars, damn liars, and experts.

__________________
and what his trumpet saith

Expert.. Ex spurt.... A former drip under pressure....

I'm sure some re-orientation is required because of the differences but that is worth getting an experienced applicant.

In Mississippi, if a veteran has completed military law enforcement and been assigned and qualified in LE duties (by assignment of MOS, AFSC, etc.), they do not have to attend the 10 week state LE academy, only the 3 week refresher. They must also have less than a 2 year break in service between military and civilian LE employment.

10 week state LE academy? Seriously? Our academy was 5 months not including 16 weeks of field training. Our training isn't even the longest in the state. There are agencies that are MUCH longer.

10 weeks? That's scary. You don't learn NEARLY enough about LE in 10 weeks.....wow.

__________________
Un-Reconstructed Southerner

Thank you all, I was relatively certain he was mistaken. As I said, he's not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed.
I am aware that there are definitely differences between civilian and military law enforcement and that I will still have to attend the civilian police academy in most states.

__________________
Just the opinion of a kid

I am another one that slipped through the cracks. 4 years as an Air Force SP, 26 years and counting in civilian law enforcement. Florida did make us go through an academy here (16 weeks), they wouldn't accept the military police academy at Lackland AFB. The department that hired me paid me to go through it so it didn't bother me any.

Wrong just plain wrong. First congrats on soon becoming a commisioned officer. Second if your going active duty you have a long while before you have to worry about it. Third and most important. They will be lined up to hire you!!!!!

Most departments recruit prior military because they know they are familiar with chain of command etc. My dept hired several ex-MPs, myself included. Just don't think MP training is a substitute for the LE Academy, it's not.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

__________________
Support your Police, & NRA

When I went the academy in Illinois in 1978 it was 6 weeks, and it didn't seem to hinder my career.

Thank you sir, though there's still two years left in my schooling and OCS between me and the old butter bar. I am still just getting started down the path really. I certainly hope they will be.

__________________
Just the opinion of a kid

I asked said friend where he had gotten such bs info, apparently the enlisted recruiters are the source of this story.

__________________
Just the opinion of a kid

Some departments will consider MP time as former law enforcement time and others won't for purposes of qualification, for example, their hiring guidelines may say: "Candidates must have a bachelor degree or 4 years of prior law enforcement experience." Some departments may consider state-certified police experience only and some may consider military police experience.

That's where the confusion may come from.

Another "I call BS."

Nuff said.

__________________
I am a sheep dog!
1601 (ret)

YEP. Bull****.
BTW, you misspelled your screen name.

When I went to the academy most of my classmates both men and women were military vets, some were college students some were of the street. 2 years later we went for reclassification/refresher training the instructor asked some questions one was how many military veterans are there most if not all raised our hands. He said that was typical because we had a good work ethic, pride and integrity instilled in us and we usually stuck around when others did not.

Or it could be we were just used to standing in line all the time.

__________________
Stan

I'm working at the MP school-(Fort Leonard Wood, MO) and most of these Branch/MOS schools are "joint" institutions-so we have Marines, Coast Guard, Navy, Airforce personnel. The MP structure mirrors the civilian counterpart-they have MP investigators, Criminal Investigation Division (CID) they conduct traffic patrol, respond to calls in the military housing areas etc. The main difference is that there are MP elements assigned to combat divisions-so those MPs have a tactical role, in addition to their garrison functions. They work hand in hand with their civilian counterparts-and you can imagine the great experience gained by interacting with forces such as the German police.
Anyway-as far as hiring in the civilian world-veterans generally receive some preferrence-but all candidates must be given a fair shot.

Soldiering (or being a Marine) is soldiering regardless of Branch or speciality-Don't allow anyone to dissuade you from doing the honorable and right thing. You will develop leadership and team building skills that will be of value to the civilian employer.

We hired veterans that had served as MP, SP or whatever their specific branch called them. It was a plus, as far as the Police Commission was concerned. They still had to meet state and local requirements, but they were generally at an advantage when it came to interaction and responses. So, by all means, go ahead with your plans and keep safe.

__________________
GA Carry member
Vietnam Vet

So how many civilian police departments conduct convoy escorts and route security missions and operate POW enclosures? As far as I can tell at MCB Quantico, there seem to be more civilian rent-a-cops on the gate and traffic patrol than MPs. At FT Belvoir, all I see are rent-a-cops, since I'm guessing the real MPs are overseas doing real MP work.

The last time I got pulled over for a traffic stop by an MP was back in 1984 at FT Hood. I pulled away too fast, apparently, from a stop sign on Battalion Avenue in my 280ZX. There were two 1st Cav MPs in a jeep on traffic patrol in the division area behind me at the stop sign. I remember looking in my rear view mirror a couple of blocks later and seeing the lights on top of the jeep, so I pulled over and waited for them to catch up. I went to the Federal Magistrate Court to fight the ticket and won, with the magistrate saying that compared to an M151A2 jeep, anything pulled away too fast.

Okay, sorry if I offended you. I wasn't trying to suggest that your career or skillset was in anyway inferior.

However, lets think about how much law enforcement has grown since 1978.

*Change in communication: I'm fairly certain that there was no such thing as the MDT in 1978. Cadets now spend almost 3 days just learning our agency specific MDT and the related systems. NCIC/DCI is it's own block of instruction.

*Domestic Violence: My state has a "shall arrest" clause in the General Statute related to domestic violence. Even by some of our "old timers" volition, "back in the day, if she wasn't bleeding no one was arrested". Let's face it, the attitude towards DV has changed drastically.

*Mental Patients: Again, by out state's General Statute, the Sheriff is responsible for all transport and serving of papers on mental patients. Even municipal agencies get stuck transporting these folks. Attitudes have changed towards mental patients in 30+ years.

*Taser: Not even on the horizon 30+ years ago.

*Pepper Spray: This block takes one entire day. You get sprayed at the end (not EVEN fun).

*Riot Control: All I can say is CS gas is the worst thing EVER!

*Accidents: One entire day on how to fill out accident reports.

*Subject Control Arrest Techniques: This block is one full week.

*Range/Firearms: One week. Covers shotgun as well as pistol. Includes one classroom day on just the pistol.

*Driving: One entire week. Standardized testing. You must pass everything.

*Physical Fitness: Our state has a standardized PT test. You must pass in a set time. Believe me it is TOUGH as it should be.

*Officer Survival: Our agency mandates a week long Officer Survival course. Totally agency designed, it is tough. No slack is given whatsoever.

I could go on and on. My point was that there is no way that 10 weeks is ample time for someone to become proficient or even basically qualified to become a law enforcement officer.

I apologize if I offended. I didn't mean to suggest you or anyone was a below par officer. However, by today's standards, 10 weeks barely gets your feet wet.

__________________
Un-Reconstructed Southerner

I do not think that length of the course or skills-training truly reflects on who will do well in real-life scenarios. I saw new personnel come to our department that literally "aced" their academy-training and were some of the worst real-life officers that truly needed extra probationary time on the job. It is just like the greatest target-shooters in the world may not be the best in a fire-fight when targets return fire.

Our department truly looked at records of those that came from military law-enforcement backgrounds and saw how they performed in those situations and it had a lot of credence in their being chosen for a position over someone that had strictly course-work at some college. Choosing a new candidate did not strictly rely upon test-scores. So, I would recommend doing the military-training and experience and coming out and applying it to civilian-life

__________________
GA Carry member
Vietnam Vet

super BS. Not allowed? Hmmmmm

However, due to the decreasing size of the military over the years, MP's are doing less garrison/LE duty and are doing more combat support.

Many military bases have civilian police departments. That is how I got my start in the feds.

However, Army CID and Air Force OSI both have special agents, and pretty much do criminal investigation work exclusively. That is what I'd do.

I'd go to the Air Force and be an OSI agent (officer).

__________________
Cheers, Charles
SWCA #2442

I can't speak to the MP background but a cousin of mine has two sons who served in the Marines. Neither was an MP. One is now a Sheriff's deputy and the other is a state trooper. I was told their military background was a plus in their hiring.

Generally the military can help you in your civilian career. However i would look into something more technical unless your real desire in life is to be an LEO.

I disagree. Most of the training in most police academies is nothing more than CYA stuff. The relevancy of the old axiom that the rookies hear when they get to the precinct of: "Now you can just forget 90% of what you learned in the academy" still holds fairly true. Patrol work in law enforcement is one of those things that you primarily learn by doing, hopefully with as little trial and error as possible. Ten weeks is plenty to learn what you need to know before your OTJ training on the street starts.

Not even close. A BIG majority of Police are former military.

Your "friend" has no idea what he is talking about.

Your friends advice is absurd nonsense.

Cheers;
Lefty

It is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word.

-Andrew Jackson

__________________
Just the opinion of a kid

If you want to serve in the military, do so. That is a stand alone decision, for which no one else can judge you. Military experience, depending on the person and what they make of it, can be a help or a hinderance. I can't think of anyone I know who has served in military LE who thinks the missions and training translate to civilian LE. I've worked with LE personnel from one branch during joint operations, and while they are good people, their training and socialization were not the same as ours. They could not do our job without a lot of re-training, and we could not do most of theirs without re-training either. One huge context difference is the military interests in the UCMJ, chain of command outside of the LE function, etc. Military LE in the long run answers to the base commander, and his/her decisions might be far different from what an LE trained boss would do. We did not care about dress codes and all other things that have meaning in the military. The change in context means a real change in mindset.

I have met and worked with excellent LE personnel who came from the military. I have met some who were utter disasters in many different ways. This is true regardless of their MOS in the service. The problem with both the military and LE is that they recruit and select from a human population, and within that population are a variety of attributes and skills. Some folks, regardless of background, should never be in LE. The military may sort them out, or may make them worse.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

Sounds like advise from the north end of a south bound bull. My son was in the AF, security, and is now a homicide detective in Memphis.

I agree with this. In fact, I don't know that there is a huge correlation between military service and potential to be a better policeman. Many former military guys I work with seem to be fairly rigid in their thinking, unwilling or unable to use discretion appropriately and unable to make a decision independently. It's ironic because this is the very attribute I hear about when people talk about former military in police: "They can make important decisions quickly without supervision." Some of them can, some of them can't. I don't see any huge difference in the decision-making ability of military vs. non-military. Many of them are more worried about "chain of command" than they should be and have no problem with passing the buck upwards when they should have made their own decision. Not saying this is true with ALL former military types, but it is far from a given that someone with military experience will make a better policeman than someone without.

Also, don't forget the many, many specialty jobs in the military that have nothing to do with leadership. And some of the absolute WORST mid-level managers I've seen in law enforcement were former officers in the military. I've noticed that those guys are the ones who seem to be more likely to rely on their rank to get things done as opposed to earning the respect of their subordinates.

If there are a lot of former military types in civil service jobs, it likely has more to do with the veterans preference points available on the civil service tests and the fact that federal grant money often funds the hiring of veterans. Not necessarily that so many places prefer military experience because vets make better cops and firemen.

Here's a question I have for cops: Management often picks a guy to be their "hatchet man" to administratively go after employees who they've designated as a target. Have you noticed that a disproportionate number of the guys they pick for hatchet man duty seem to be former military officers? I wonder if the "mission first" mindset makes them more willing to screw their colleagues for the sake of their own ambition?

Interesting post: Inspection personel are inspection personel....Not a job I would like but necessary...Most medium to large departments seem to think they are required . Sure not the job to win a popularity contest. I never checked up on the military background of guys in the inspection service..Never even occurred to me....We called them Sho-Flies...Not drinking buddies, but not the enemy either.....They had their jobs we had ours.....

With our department and other local LEO's I know military vets get additional points on the Civil Service exams. Everyone has to take them but we have had several military vets working with us, USMC, Army, Air Force and Navy alike.

__________________
Vaya con Dios

Pay no attention to the information your friend is telling you. It's all wrong. Like others have said, you'll be attending an academy that will teach you the laws of that particular state. Almost all departmentments welcome "former Marine's" as applicants. What you're going to have to do is to keep your nose clean before you separate from the Corp. You don't want to start a new career with a dirty jacket. Good luck to you and Thank You for your service in the Marine Corp!

While I was hesitant to say what MaximumLawman did, I have seen the same sorts of things, and some departments really magnify that. We have one large agency in this state that is infamous for treating its personnel poorly (last I heard they were 0 for 23 on their last 23 arbitrations), and loses virtually all the suits against it by both employees and citizens. Big bucks, too. A $2.3M settlement for a false arrest case based on a perjured warrant application not involving physical injury, and one for over $800K plus attorney fees for fabricating grounds to fire a Captain. Their mindset is a lot like what ML described. They needed to be taken over by DOJ a lot more than Seattle ever did, and I wouldn't generally advocate letting DOJ taking over a nursery school because they are so ignorant.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.