GeBlack

One last statement. Phillip Morris, in accordance with the out of court settlement was forced, along with the monetary amount, to perform certain community service acts including funding anti-smoking commercials, training, and publicly announcing the delitorious affects of smoking using wording which was provided to them. I know the lack of any direct studies showing a causal relationship between smoking and disease is mostly due to the amount of time that such a study would have to monitor individuals and the lack of true scientific control of other possible disease causing factors which

NJCubScouter Your risk analysis scenario while enlightening on a personal level does not fully explain the situation it only rationalizes the reasons for not banning auto usage. You completely avoid any less extreme attempts to lessen fatalities even though there are many ways in which it could be done. I provided you with hard facts showing the danger of automobile usage especially to young adults. Can you show me hard facts showing the danger of exposing children to adults smoking cigarettes, or even scientific studies showing definitive ill effects of second hand smoke? It wo

In order to provide information from alternative sources so that you might get a different perspective on this issue (or in the very least have a better understanding of 'statistics' that are bandied about) I recommend reading Lauren Colby's book at http://www.lcolby.com/pdf/book.pdf'>http://www.lcolby.com/pdf/book.pdf or http://www.lcolby.com/

See the CDC statistics at http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10.html if you want to see how much of a risk this is to our youth.

How unfortunate that the mitigating factors for not pursuing a ban on motor vehicles be economy and convenience, don't you care at all about the children who die in auto accidents each year. The fact that it is the leading cause of death for persons under the age of 35? Even if you wouldn't support a nationwide ban on autos, maybe the BSA could idealistically lead the way by banning vehicle use at all of it's events. And if people couldn't do without their vehicles, at least keep them out of site from our youth. You don't want to encourage a behavior which leads to the types of pain and

I think I've got the next crusade. Let's ban automobiles!! -120 deaths per day in the USA alone are due to automobile accidents -One car produces 2.7 billion cubic yards of poisonous air during its normal life (producing much more respiratory distress than cigarettes) -Car crashes are the number one cause of death in children in North America -29 tons of waste material are created during the construction of a single automobile -There have been more deaths and disfigurement due to car accidents than in the two world wars -The quest for oil and gas results in frequent wars

My sympathies for your loss and the difficulties you are facing. I myself have a 100 y/o grandmother who has alzheimers, never smoked and has required constant care for the last 20 years. Aging, death and disease are not pleasant no matter how they happen. People do not steal their time away from other people, it was never theirs to give, smoking does not guarantee a lingering death from lung cancer or emphysema. You may wake up tomorrow to have a toilet drop on your head. Enjoy the time you are given with the one's you love. Respect their choices even if you do not agree with them.

You chose to use a prison story to parallel the situation which occurred to a paying guest at a scouting event? I guess I'm beginning to see the point of reference which I am up against. My old drill instructor used to call it the my way or the highway mentality, of course he was absolutely in charge so that worked for him. Bob, before the event I was not even aware of the G2SS. I could not have noticed the discrepancy if I was not aware that there were two opposing statements. So I couldn't have asked my unit leader for clarification of a statement which in my eyes was very clear. W

OK, given the G2SS states that you "may not allow" and that this means prohibited. What does it mean when a regional scouting organization states: "We encourage leaders to take one additional step in setting a good example for the youth of our council. Please give serious consideration on taking a weekend break from the use of all tobacco products. Young minds are impressionable and the Scouting youth frequently look to their leaders as role models." (http://ads.omaha.com/sites/boyscouts/jubilee_general.zip, page six) Does this also say prohibit? If not, how do you reconci

dan, You are misinterpreting, but it is apparent that you want to see it that way so I won't try to change your opinion. My 7 y/o son has already progressed beyond the good/bad right/wrong stage. He is already aware that there are multiple viewpoints that are not his own, this does not make those viewpoints wrong. I will continue to foster those ideas as he grows up regardless of the poor examples he may see.

scoutldr, thank you for your addition to the conversation. 1. Alcohol is not allowed in state parks 2. Alcohol consumption is not common in public places (unless you frequent different places than I) 3. You characterization of 'smokers' as litterbugs surely exemplifies your superiority 4. You are a scout leader so you not only are already aware of the G2SS, you have already bought in to it's directions by continued registration as a scout leader. If I'm not mistaken the wording is quite clear on this topic and I have seen no literature put out by a scouting entity which say

I apologize for being so relentlesss in my discussion of this issue. The primary purpose of my posts is to encourage that the policy be solidified. I present it here becuse this forum is frequented by those who are within the network to relay my feedback. I neither want condolence of my actions or condemnation of other's actions, although I do appreciate those who are able to see the situation as it was presented. This is not an argument to be won/lost. It was an illustration of the shortcomings of the current policy statement and the problems which can occur because of a lack of a clear

No I was not trying to push an agenda, I had been waiting in line for over 40 minutes so my son could participate in the event. I saw no need to excuse myself to a remote location since there had been no statement of prohibition. I stated 'His' to show the overbearing way in which he presented himself, not to imply his ultimate authority for the area. You apparently have not read anything that I have written. Nor are you able to recognize that the information being given to parents concerning the use of tobacco is either non-existant or misleading. You act as if it is a generally kno

OK, let me try to bring this back to focus. 1. I was not aware of any 'rule' forbidding smoking in front of scouts. 2. The Mid-America Council event literature did not state any prohibition of smoking in fact the wording was 'discourages' and was directed at scout leaders. 3. As such I was not knowingly breaking a rule, if this is a well known policy then it was the Mid-America Council which was breaking the rule by reducing the prohibition to an advisory discouragement(Bob, take note since you are from the midwest) 4. I question the ethical impact of an adult smoking at a

No, I am not trying to interpret to fit my personal desires. I'm simply pointing out that if this is an accepted long standing practice that the statement in the event paperwork makes no sense. If smoking around BSA youth has always been prohibited (for at least 5 years), then why the statement encouraging leaders to refrain from smoking for the weekend? I'm also saying that if the message is not being given effectivly then it makes it that much more wrong for righteous leaders to confront parents at an outdoor event. And yes the military does prohibit smoking, and they state th

Right, if this is the stated position of the BSA then they need to do a lot more to get the word out. My 12/yo son has been scouting for the past 5 years and this is the first that I have heard of it. Along with that the training needs to teach tact in addressing it with parents, not treat it as a crusade where smokers are all evil heathen and the troop leaders are all older, wiser diciplinarians, Bob. I for one, disagree with the intolerant stance that BSA has taken on this and other issues. But I'm sure those that walk so righteous a path are easily able to justify their actions no

Regarding adherance to policies and other laws. While the blind adherance to policy and/or laws does make for an orderly society it does not make for a healthy society. It is our duty as good citizens and I suggest good scouts/scout leaders to challenge policy if it is found to be objectionable or unjust. I hate to trot out the forefathers, but if they had decided to pay the tea (and other taxes) to finance the French-Indian war without objection we would probably still be paying homage to the queen. While this may not be entirely applicable to the situation at hand, I have filed a c

1. The guide states that a leader MAY prohibit smoking. It does not say that it IS prohibited. 2. The event was OUTSIDE, no children were subject to second hand smoke. 3. Prior communication stated that smoking was discouraged, not prohibited. I have been a courteous smoker long before it was politically correct to do so. I do not smoke where my second-hand smoke might offend others. I will not take the abuse given by other do-gooders just because they have the political momentum in their favor and feel that I'm not projecting the correct image. The statement about overweig

Yes, the rule does state 'may' and this very item empowers leaders to act indiscriminately and without prior coordination. Point in fact. I attended a Jamboree this weekend with my sons where it was the intent of one particular leader that He would not allow smoking in his archery range while the Jamboree flyer stated that smoking was 'discouraged'. This petty tyrant stance led to very uncomfortable 'crack downs' at this leader's stand when he 'dealt with' unsuspecting parents. I was one. This was done in such an unprofessional and tactless way in the obvious attempt to belittle me (

Let's portray 'the smoker' (even the title strips away the humanity of the person who occasionally partakes of tobacco products) as an evil, poor image for youth. Let us all overlook any other qualities that the person may have other than the formost politically correct frailty which they may exhibit. In that way we can teach our young to judge people by the most superficial of attributes. After we get rid of all the smokers, let's start working on the overweight troop leaders (from my viewpoint this is a much more pervasive problem). We don't want our youth to idealize _that_ type of pe