Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/25/21 in all areas

  1. I am not calling anyone’s claim or legitimacy into question, but I’ve thought a lot about those numbers, having only my own frame of reference, experience and research to mull. As a survivor from an alcoholic, abusive home, I have a pretty good understanding of “walling off” memories. So, in light of that, I think the second number is very easy to understand, the first less so. I said this ages ago on the forum, but some geographic touch point seems available to most people. I lived in this town in this general location. We went to an Elk’s Club or school and I could walk. Something. I don’t u
    4 points
  2. With the turn of the years, autumn again brings thoughts of campfires, wood smoke memories, s'mores, burnt hotdogs, songs and gazing into the embers..... Campfire safety being of utmost importance (I hope and pray you never find yourself saying, "I thought I put it out"), I find myself remembering when I used to heat my modest cabin with wood. I thought I might record some ideas in that vein, (please bear in mind , this is past history.....) therefore: How to Heat with Wood for Free! It is easy to heat your home for free with wood! I have done it for many years
    3 points
  3. That is more than likely the same argument from 50 years ago when virtually no background checks were. To expensive, to burdensome etc. etc. and where did that get BSA. How many less victims would there have been. I will say it again if MANDANTORY background checks were done on all those who did an overnight with scouters and it saved only ONE scouter from being abused it would be well worth the cost and effort.
    2 points
  4. It is all about personal responsibility and past history. Third hand story: Talking to a Scouter friend: He was a Scoutmaster for a time, then dropped back to being Committee Chair as health and age interfered. One time during a Troop meeting, a new fellow came in, and he was directed to my friend, now Com Chair. The new man said he was an Eagle, and had just moved into the area and wanted to get back into Scouting. Friend said great, do you have a kid to join the Troop? man said no, he was single, but wanted to give back, as he was given in his Scouting days. Friend said great, her
    2 points
  5. Call them and say if they want to go home with the awards tomorrow they need to come with a check or cash to give you to cover what is owed. If they can't do that, tell them you'll hand their son an empty envelope so that he is at least verbally recognized and when they get the money together, you'll get the awards to them. You don't ever want to publicly shame a kid because his parents didn't pay. Normally I would say treat them as a scholarship case but if you have already been fronting personal money to keep the pack going, then you can't take that on too. I don't know what the
    2 points
  6. Give the Cub her/his award(s) on Tuesday. It's too late to do otherwise. Then get your records in order... unless their are extenuating circumstance: Give non payers a reminder after a set time and if no payment thereafter... "cut them off/out" after an established time period. I wouldn't worry too much... perhaps this family's payment due records are as 'screwy' as the Packs.
    2 points
  7. The TCC has apparently had enough of Survivors being misled. Just got a message that this video has dropped::
    2 points
  8. What you see as a dream is the only way we attend camp. A lot of units somehow don't follow the two adult rule at summer camp, I think because it is not expressly ordered by BSA, which is to my mind a problem. Perhaps it's no coincidence that many of the abuse cases seem to be linked to summer camps.
    1 point
  9. We actually already don't allow single adults at our campsite. If you are at our campsite, you need a 2nd adult present. We identified that years ago as a potential risk (many years before I became SM). We also tell scouts that they need to find a buddy when coming back to camp.
    1 point
  10. I would not make a scene. Is it possible they don't have the money? Or maybe it's something else that's completely innocuous. I would talk to them, privately.
    1 point
  11. If it costs $50 for each background check, and many need to get done to allow adults to participate (under some possible future set of rules), would it be worthwhile to have spent those tens of thousands of dollars if exactly one predator is identified and prevented from registering? How about if no predator is identified, but the hurdle the background check represents prevents one predator from attempting to register? My answer is yes, it's worth the time, trouble and cost.
    1 point
  12. It does...calculator?? $3500 x 500 claimants = $1,750,000 $1,750,000 x .40 = $700,000 And if you have 1000 clients, or 2500, then the fees naturally increase... P.S. Arythmetic is a hip-hop band
    1 point
  13. Outside Pennsylvania and, perhaps soon, California, unregistered generally does mean without child abuse clearance. Given what we know has happened within the BSA, we should be moving toward registered meaning cleared. The screening process needs to be far more robust than it is now.
    1 point
  14. Understood, and having adults as buddies will not eliminate CSA, but it would reduce the number of instances, I firmly believe...
    1 point
  15. One idea we had was to buddy up before summer camp, and let them pick their mutual schedule. May lead to repeating the coursework, but repetition is not a bad thing with some badges.
    1 point
  16. @Eagle1993, I’m afraid statistics regarding male vs. female perpetrators are rapidly changing. I don’t want to dis any other youth organizations, but from staff who’ve worked in female exclusive camps, I’ve learned that reigning in grooming/abuse is a challenge. Maybe it’s because when one multiplies 1/5 of perpetrators being female by young females being 3 to 6 times more likely to be victims it doesn’t decrease female youth’s risk of assault in a camp governed mostly by female adults. (And I let my daughter hang out with college students when she was a youth. It was a net positive. I ha
    1 point
  17. I do like the Canadian approach. In short, parents have a cheaper/faster path to get clearance to attend events like campout, but that clearance is only good for 5 events. After those 5 events, they must register and have a more detailed check. That seems to balance the two competing concerns. more parents at events is good for helping address youth on youth abuse/bullying/etc.
    1 point
  18. First, let’s be clear that “un-registered” does not equate to “without child abuse clearance.” Worse, most parents, given stricter requirements, would complete their application just before departing for camp. I doubt their clearances would go through instantly. Therefore, until systems are tightened, “registered” will not equal “cleared” for most purposes. Although PA’s clearance laws ease the burden of screening, I don’t get comfort from them. A malefactor can do a lot in the five year gap between filings. Secondly, in other youth-facing projects, we still welcome being accountable to
    1 point
  19. Yes! IMHO, this falls under the "duty of care" umbrella for the registered adults, seeing as how 40-50 percent of abuse is by relatives (hence no tenting with parents after Cubs), and another 40 percent by acquaintances. (Final ten by strangers.) Too many adults I know want to use the checks as a crutch, though. As if a person having a clean record indicates they are not a potential threat. Background checks are just one piece of the puzzle...a "barrier," But, very often, abusers do not have a record "...and they know it." https://www.pennlive.com/midstate/2011/11/how_effective_ar
    1 point
  20. If we assume it's true that the presence of unregistered parents increases the accountability of the registered Scouters, wouldn't we get even more comfort as to the safety of the youths at an event, of those parents were background checked?
    1 point
  21. "The Solicitation Agent’s E-Ballot Platform is the sole manner in which Ballots will be accepted via electronic or online transmission. Ballots submitted by facsimile, email or other means of electronic transmission will not be counted." https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/beb124f7-e931-4b0c-97cb-006a315622e8_6438.pdf at page 51 of 278
    1 point
  22. Aren’t NST leads volunteers? So, no costs. Regardless, reason to spend on this vs other areas is to recognize that the BSA must become more diverse. If the BSA remains mostly white, it will continue to become increasingly irrelevant.
    1 point
  23. I think this must be one of those deep fakes I hear about. No honest lawyer would actually say these falsehoods and fear monger to enrich himself at the expense of men who were violently raped as boys, right?
    1 point
  24. The Rothweiler video is DISGUSTING. He expressly states that if your claim is not in an "open" state that you will receive nothing. Importantly, he fails to recognize the many thousands of claims that are in statute even in bad states because the survivor is still within the timeframe under the applicable statute. Also, he quickly throws in the trash all of the claims in Oregon, Washington, and New Mexico, which each have very liberal rules when comes to this point. He also fails to tell everyone that under the plan those in "closed" stated will receive as little as 1% - 10% of their claims a
    1 point
  25. More of THE KEN SHOW starring KEN and featuring the SHYSTERETTES!
    1 point
  26. For those* who like org charts and job descriptions: https://www.scouting.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Full-Position-Descriptions.pdf * and before you click, please guess how many times the word "strengthen" is used in this 21 page document.
    1 point
  27. Are you kidding me? Gravity, angular momentum, and slip knots! Yo-yo = scouting + STEM encapsulated in a toy.
    1 point
  28. Probably because you didn't propose that uniforms should be required. You propose that uniforms are required. There is a big difference. If you acknowledge the clear fact that uniforms aren't required, and never have been required, I think people would be far more receptive to having a calm and rational discussion with you about whether or not a rule change (to make uniforms mandatory) would be a good idea.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...