Eagle732

I like the idea that the PLC gets to have a say in who is the new SM. If I were running I'd promise free ice cream for all scouts at every meeting. Bet I would win over the other guy who wants to do that stupid patrol method thing Our committee votes on SM every Nov. I never apply but someone keeps putting my name in.

Or like in this case vote with your feet and join another troop. I hope we find out what happens in this case. I think the OP said the COR is a hands off kinda guy, but I think if he knew this was going on he might get involved.

Anybody know the words to this song by Toby Keith? "Red Solo Cup, I fill you up, let's have a party, lets have a party" And this is why we have Professional Scouters who can enforce the rules. Because sometimes the adults don't do what they are suppose to do. CM and buddies drinking and the COR not stopping it. My guess is that "the publishers of the guidebooks" will drop the hammer on this outfit. I think you handled it just right WestCoast, you did the right thing for those Cubs. I hope the church gets someone in the COR job that cares as much as you do before they loose their charter.

The real answer is the G2SS is a guidebook with rules which are enforced at different levels. Bold print hard rules and regular print recommendations. Tour and fundraising permits are part of the rules and they are governed by Council. Same with council camps, get caught with booze at our camp and the ranger (a council employee) will escort you off the property. Some rules are enforced by District. Camporees and Day Camps are District events and the district staff enforces the rules there. Most rules are enforced at the unit level by the COs and Scouters who care and want to follow the rules. Fortunately that's most of us. Scouters have the responsibility to address problems when we see them in an appropriate way. If we see evidence of child abuse we report it. If we see drinking on camping trips we stop it. If we see unsafe behavior we point it out before someone gets hurt. Sometimes with minor infractions this can be done by pulling the offender off to the side and asking them politely to correct the aberrant behavior. Some things, such as child abuse got straight to the top, SE and LEO. If I saw a unit behaving badly I would have no problem pointing it out to the SM, in fact I did just that 2 months ago on a camping trip. The problem was solved quickly. If I saw a serious problem in another unit, such as drinking on a camping trip I would address that with the SM and depending on their response I might consider the problem solved or if not, pursue it with their council. I don't consider this "talking smack about another unit" I consider it doing the right thing. Council and National are the ones who are ultimately responsible for enforcing the rules. Just ask anyone removed for YP violations. But to say that BSA is just the publisher of guidebooks is a gross understatement.

Gee, and for all these years I thought the items in bold print in the G2SS were the BSA rules and policies and the items in regular print were just guidelines. I don't know where I got that idea.

Alcohol use during an outing is a violation of the G2SS. "The Boy Scouts of America prohibits the use of alcoholic beverages and controlled substances at encampments or activities on property owned and/or operated by the Boy Scouts of America, or at any activity involving participation of youth members." Who enforces the G2SS? What's the penalty to a SM or CM for not following the G2SS? Could a Scouter be removed for not following G2SS?

Cross, I think you should have mentioned you were the CC/COR in your opening post. You didn't mention that until your third post, 33 posts into the discussion. Tampa mentioned you were an ASM but I don't know where he got that from. Thing is if you come here for advice then you need to give the whole story right out of the gate. My opinion stands, let the SM handle it. If I had a CC/COR going to District about troop problems then they would be looking for a new SM. Our policy is no one goes to District, leaders or parents unless it's a YP problem of course, that goes to the SE. My last discussion over a parent complaint to the DE went like this: DE - Mr. SM I had a call yesterday from one of your parents about two kids fighting at a camping trip are you aware of this? Me - Yep I sure am. DE - Then it's taken care of? Me - Sure is. DE - Great, have a nice day. Interesting that the DEs always call the SM and not the CORs.

When the SPL is confronted it will be interesting to see if he give 100 reasons why it wasn't his fault or if he takes responsibility for his actions and sincerely apologizes.

If I had a new parent come on a camping trip with a six pack I would tell him in no uncertain terms to lock it up and I never want to see it again. In a case like that a few words can solve the problem. However the OP describes a a situation where he has first hand knowledge of alcohol use by the adults in this unit in the past and a report from a new member to his unit that transferred from the other unit because of ongoing use of alcohol. The OP asks "is this something I should report, or will it be seen as a malcontent ? " The short answer is YES he should report and he shouldn't care if he is seen as a malcontent. This wasn't a generic "what would you do if someone showed up on a camping trip with booze" question. I hope the OP does the right thing before someone gets hurt.

Wouldn't want to talk smack about another unit. Wonder how you would feel if there was an alcohol related accident on the way home from an outing and you didn't report. Report it for what it is, second hand knowledge. Especially since there is first hand knowledge of past activities.

Scoutfish, wear it proudly, you have fought the tough fight. Good luck, I hope you stay well. And you have reminded me that it's time for a check-up.

Again, have you talked with the COR or IH? I know if our COR heard about drinking during troop activities he would be on me with both feet, and rightfully so!

Maybe a friendly heads up to the IH and/or COR of the offending pack?

Since you are not the SM I would suggest (from the perspective of a SM) that you talk with the SM, offer your opinion and then let him take care of it. Support his decision, whatever it is. He has enough to deal with without a bunch of parents second guessing him.

North Face Paramount Peak Convertible. Not cheap but they wear like iron. New Taupe color matches the BSA pants.

" the father blast the booth into pieces with his ray gun." I think ray guns are banned by the G2SS.

" the father blast the booth into pieces with his ray gun." I think ray guns are banned by the G2SS.

Leaders today certainly have different challenges that yesterdays leaders did.

Do you know that they actually paid dues to the other pack?

"Gotta remember that the district and council are there to support the units, not the other way around." Yes this would be a very good thing to remember. Now if I could just figure out a way to get Council to agree! I won't hold my breath. Just my experience as a Scoutmaster, YMMV.

That's cause it's not officially out yet.

It's hard to help those that won't help themselves. It's hard to teach responsibility when the adults always step in to make things right. Eagle is important but not as important as the life lessons learned.

Sounds like this Scout has his priorities in order! If I was his SM I would do everything I could to help him. I offered in an earlier post a similar situation where I would not have helped a Scout after he turned down an opportunity and decided to try the easy route. In this case the Scout was working for an appointment to a military academy (do we know which one?). As SM I really appreciate when Scouts hold off on taking a POR if they know they won't have the time to commit, usually due to sports. So in this case the Scout was being responsible, he could have taken a POR and then not had the time to commit to it. Then the unit or patrol suffers.

You might want to to find out what the SM intends to do, he could have good reason for not providing a POR for the scout. I had a situation where the SPL and I agreed that his ASPL would be removed from the position because he had not attended a meeting or even talked with the SPL in two months. He got 1 month credit for the ASPL job. This scout was coming up on Eagle and did not have enough time in POR and he was 8 months away from 18. I offered him a job as Instructor, a SM appointed position, with clear expectations of what he was to do. He turned it down instead gambling on another stint as ASPL with a new SPL after the next election. He got it but if he hadn't I would not have offered him another appointed position. I do think that he took advantage of the kind and helpful nature of the SPL. Your SM might have a situation where he expects the scout to solve his problem himself.

If I were ever a Cubmaster again I would run the Webelos program differently than I did before. Last time all Bear DL's advanced to WDL with their den. Seemed like the logical thing to do but some of the new WDLs had no intention of ever taking the Webs camping and knew little about the outdoors. Latter I thought back to my Webelos days in the late 60's. In my pack we had a Den Mother for Wolf and Bear dens but we you went to Webs the troop had a guy just for that job. He was a real outdoors guy and we did outdoors stuff. No more Cub crafts. I notice that most of the Webs I talk to today are pretty much done with Cubs by their second year. Of course finding that outdoor guy is the tough part, I might have to be the WDL too.