fred8033

This issue will not go away. Though I don't see the harm and I could easily counter-argue from many directions, it's non-productive. Society has changed. Kids don't watch cowboy and Indian movies anymore. Whole generations are losing connections to our past. ... The key problem is protesters will always be using BSA to prove their point at BSA's expense. .... IMHO ... We can come up with our own ceremonies that are just meaningful without using Indian lore. ... Sadly, our scouts will lose out by being less aware of our countries Indian past, but so be it.

Agreed. I was referring to inside the unit. Inside the unit, the COR should be almost invisible. Almost invisible to the scout. Maybe, the COR takes a seat the at the unit committee meetings, maybe. Outside the unit, yes. The COR "should" be actively representing the unit to the sponsoring or and the council.

That's what I was thinking. If money is recovered, it would go back to the non-profit (or an equivalent non-profit). In a way, it could financially help the NRA. ... Unless this is all a publicity stunt. ... I just can't see the NRA dissolved. This appears like the AG is more concerned about damaging the image than applying law.

I'm not a NRA fan, but the charges seem reasonable, ... BUT ... Dissolving the non-profit (aka NRA)? If the top officers of a non-profit are effectively embezzling funds for their own purpose, then it's right to prosecute. BUT, the original non-profit has been around for almost 148 years. The intention of donors / members is well understood. So, the result of successful prosecution should be the returning of the funds to the non-profit for their original non-profit purpose. Even the idea of returning money? Much of the money has been legitimately spent or won't be recoverable

Know that ... You have a right to ask what the concerns are. You have a right to tell the EBOR (district and council) there are certain adults you do not want sitting on your son's EBOR. I have seen a few occasions when adults target specific scouts. In those cases, we have let the district / council advancement chair know there is history and the scout deserves a clean EBOR opportunity. Note that after the council certifies a scout to have an EBOR, it's hard for the EBOR to say no to the scout.

IF AS WRITTEN ... that's justification minimum to never have that adult sit on another EBOR. It's justification from district to either say that EBOR is null and void or to take other action. IMHO, as soon as a volunteer utters those words, they should be removed from the EBOR. Period.

We can disagree. Most CORs won't do anything. The CC and SM should. But parents absolutely have the right to stand up for their kids when their kids are wronged.

Adults often volunteer for positions to get one-up on someone else. It's sad and it's 100% wrong. Unit commissioners have no place injecting themselves into the workings of the troop they are mentoring. I would submit a complaint directly to the council leadership. ... IF IT IS AS YOU REPRESENT ... he should be removed as a commissioner. I'd argue he has the wrong attitude and he went after a scout. It's an indicator he should not be a registered scouter ... but that's up to the council. Send a direct, specific, concise statement (incident and history) and send it to the the c

Beautiful pictures. How were the bugs?

BSA is a great organization. I'm very sad to hear this.

I agree. I might have been a bit to quick to state. I found the statement funny. "There are no uniform police." ... Many of us have defended or advocated for scouts when they are confronted by self-appointed uniform police. The advice is correct though. Focus on a good experience and get out and doing things. Uniform is not required.

LOL ... Ideally, I agree with you. Reality, many adult leaders think there is one. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/510784(19)_Scouts_Uniform_Inspection_Sheet_WEB.pdf

I need to hire a personal professional editor. I re-write, but I never clean up.

I was going to post this response with T2Eagle ... I agreed with the earlier comment that it's not really a PLC decision ... ideally. I'd add on ... even if the unit has an official uniform ... I'd applaud a patrol that wants to form it's own identity. A patrol is the fundamental unit of scouting. SO ... if a patrol wants their own specific hat, go for it. The patrol is the fundamental unit of scouting. We want strong patrol cohesion. We want other patrols to admire and want to be like other patrols. It raises the bar. So, if one patrol wants a specific patrol hat, I'd really like to

This is right up there with can the patrol vote to have an official pencil color. Sure. Your patrol. Why not.

It's okay to feel strongly. We're in very emotional times. Everyone of us can easily pull ridiculous events from daily news. For me, it's the constant resistance to police these days. Protest in public opinion and fight in court. Don't add pressure on them as they their immediate job. For me, the title "scoutmaster" carries little long term weight and has a lot of baggage due to mis-interpretation. ... But, that's me. And it's not the biggest battle.

Good point. Interesting. I still remember 35+ years ago watching a play with James Earle Jones, "Master Harold and the boys". My concern was always about the nuanced implications of words. I've never been that concerned with PC, though I do try to be PC. ... or at least stay quiet at those times. ... My focus was more on the nuanced implications of "master". The term "advisor" is much much much more closely aligned with my vision of the adult contact for a troop. Even "coach" is not as close as many see the coach putting the players on the field and the coach

This is a whole topic in itself. When the scoutmaster is not available, troops do need to find an ASM to assume the role. BUT the ideal is there is one person at the helm scoutmastering the troop. The rest is done by the youth. Doesn't matter if it's a 10 person or a 100 person troop. That's the ideal. In reality, I had a great experience for about 12 years with one man as the scoutmaster. The troop has several ASMs, but the SM was clearly the SM. The ASMs had their individual roles supporting, but were not "scoutmaster".

State laws do apply. Federal laws are significant though because they were often the driving force to change state laws. The early example is the the 1974 CAPTA law would withhold federal funds given to states if the states did not pass laws. That is how federal laws often drive state changes.

We will have to differ on this. It's an ugly situation and people can be rightly upset. I've read many of the files. They are all about ugly situations. BSA is not 100% clean. Generally though, I see people trying to deal procedurally with very challenging problems and incidents. Many of the files have requests to update the files. Many have statements about trying to block the person in the future. Or trying to tell if it is the same person. A common theme is communication between BSA, council, units, charter partners about the cases. Often about the person being recommended to

It's just not that clear. Crimes were not prosecuted because of challenges. Civil actions for child sexual abuse were not legislated until 1984 admendments to the 1974 CAPTA law. ... I'm not a lawyer. My simplification and facts are no where near 100% clean. Generally, I believe I am accurate. The whole topic is just not that simple. Also, the ugliness of this topic blurs clear thinking on the past. I just don't think people understood the nature of the abuse until late 1990s / early 2000s. ... In 1970, child sexual abuse was still mostly unspoken. Male-on-male child sexua

QUESTION #1 - Are the new dues a recognition that on-going operating cost of BSA will be based almost fully on incoming dues? Recognizing that current endowments are lost and there will no way to subsidize ongoing operations? QUESTION #2 - Are any of the dues such that they can pay debt on assets (camps, buildings) that may need to be mortgage to pay damages? Essentially, bankruptcy is a line in the sand. New dues and new fundraising will be needed to keep BSA afloat and pay new property mortgages.

I understand the anger and frustration, but these cases did not happen in a vacuum. Parents were usually involved. Often police, educators, church, etc. Society was involved. IMHO, these files should be applauded as a BSA effort to nationally block volunteers before police, schools and society ever tried to do that. In the 1970s, there was no such thing as a national predator database. There were no instant background checks. IMHO, BSA should be applauded they had this system in place. My question ... how many people were identified and blocked as ineligible because these f

I'm still baffled how liability that had long ago expired against situations that society did not understand and that did not have the laws we had today can be reversed. It baffles me how past incidents can retroactively have liability applied. It seems we should be applying the laws and liability in placed when the incidents occurred. Anything else is unfair and immoral.

Absolutely. People might have not known the extent or the specific individuals, but people knew these things happen. With specific incidents, I'd be interested how many involved only the BSA paid staff. I'm betting with almost every case, there were outside individuals who knew.