Re: Was Need Advice (tad long), now MY OPINION

"Settummanque, the blackeagle - Mike L. Walton" wrote:
>
> Kent Williams <orange-eagle@JUNO.COM> wrote in part:
>
> >I am sick and tred of people bristling at the very MENTION of the
> >word military!!! Just who do you think won the rights and
> >privledges you seem to enjoy, yet take for granted with your
> >constant harping and whining about America having a military?
>
> Let's see...I believe that people are "harping and whining" not
> about us having a military, but rather having our youth *trained
> up* as potential military personnel *without their consent or
> desire* to do so.
>
> That's why we have Junior ROTC in our high schools, and why we have
> some Learning for Life/Explorer Posts which specialize in "military
> science".
>
> That's also why we have military academics and schools scattered
> all over this land and why we have "direct programs" like our
> service academics for our youth to enter in IF THEY SO DESIRE.

(snip)

> Somehow, some of our Scouters get the idea that the two *should be
> together*, which is where the "bristling" you mention comes from.
> I feel the same way. The two can work together (and have, many
> times over the history of both organizations). The two can "play
> off each other" (as witnessed during our last five National Scout
> Jamborees) and provide REAL TRAINING for each other and their
> interests. But when people read or hear or go to places whereby
> the Scoutmaster is more like a Drill Instructor; or whereby the
> Scouts themselves want to "arm themselves like Rambo" or "dress
> like they're going to "the field" "...that's where the distinction
> between a youth program aimed at character, citizenship and
> personal fitness develop and an adult program aimed at developing
> defenders of our freedoms, liberties and the American way of life
> should END.

You pretty much covered what I was trying to say, and a lot more
clearly. Basically, where I was coming from in my comments was that
several years ago (golly, probably 6-7 by now) I was a scout at a
Camporee at Fort Belvoir, where I took the Rifle Merit Badge (As well as
Wilderness survival). I was grateful for the use of the military
facilities, and I felt the Wilderness Survival class was very well
taught, especially since it was geared towards anyone who might have to
send a night lost in the woods--not just future soldiers.
However, the Rifle class was a nightmare. I should start by saying I'm
generally a proponent of gun control. I chose to take the Rifle badge
to expand my views of guns and shooting sports; I wanted to see if I
could appreciate guns as something other than a tool for killing people
(I'd shot before at Goshen Scout camps, but only once as a
Scoutmaster/SPL competetition). Unfortunately, the class was geared
towards killing people. The first half was taught out of a warehouse,
where a guy had a personal arsenal and shooting range, filed with
vaguely antigovernment flyers and the like. I understand that he has
every right to such opinions, but the whole situation wierded me out,
contributing to my strong reaction to the second half.
The second half was held at a shooting range at Belvoir. We were
handed modified military rifles (modified so that they were only
semiautomatic, rather than fully automatic), and given a lecture on how
the American military rifles compared to the Chinese, Russian, and
Israeli models as high tech killing machines. In addition, a
low-ranking soldier came by to tell a story of how when he was in basic
training he'd been forced to shoot a couple times "Rambo Style" with the
but of his gun planted at his crotch--he seemed proud to tell us of how
he'd been "pissing blood for a week" but that it'd be a great way to
"make men out of you boys *when* (emphasis mine) you join the
military". When we actually did do any shooting, it was at human torso
sillouettes, with the quality of our shooting based on whether we'd have
killed the target if it was a real person. I was disgusted by the whole
experience, and almost quit scouts--I think I would have, if my
Wilderness Survival class hadn't been so well taught. I completed the
Wilderness Survival badge and felt that it was something to be proud of
earning. On the other hand, in the rifle class we hadn't fulfilled
almost any of the requirements, since the point of the whole exercise,
apparently, wasn't to earn the badge but to learn to kill. I was proud
I HADN'T earned the badge, given what that badge now represented for me,
and I didn't feel proud of being a scout for some time.
It would have been a huge loss for me if I'd been driven away from
scouting by that experience; I later earned my Eagle Badge and am still
active in Scouting as an Adult (I'm currently organizing a "Merit Badge
University" at my college campus). I just want to make sure experiences
like my Rifle MB class aren't shared by future scouts, since I don't
want to see potential Eagles and Adult Leaders driven away from a
program that has so much to offer when handled well.
I should note that I have no real complaint with the military itself; I
have friends in ROTC programs and respect them just as much as if they
were training for civilian carreers, and in some cases more given the
sacrifices they've made for their training. However, I am appalled by
the idea of teaching a teenage or preteen boy to kill without parental
consent, without respecting his personal moral code and feelings about
killing, and without respecting the autonomy of a youth movement that is
ideally open to both future Generals and future pacifists, and everyone
in between.

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message
• Previous message

What's become of SCOUTER Magazine, the print publication?

Buy the Back Issues