John-in-KC

A preliminary before I start answering: I assume the new leader can be of either gender, may or may not have their own special needs, most likely lacks functional outdoor skills, and was not a youth member of BSA or GSUSA. First, You need a commitment from the volunteer that he will undertake training. There is no such commitment on the leader app at this time. So, there's the first systemic fix... a buy-in from the new volunteer. Second, You need multiple and frequent delivery media, for at least two reasons. Not everyone learns well in a lecture. Not everyone learns well from small group discussion. The blind, truly, cannot see (and if you don't think we wont have some special needs adults, think again). The deaf cannot hear. You have to meet the need. Another reason for multiple delivery media is people's lives. Six times a year, I go to shift work... 12/12 continuous ops for two weeks a pop. I'm not available to anybody else for any reason. You need multiple opportuntities to answer the requirement. So, online training may be the best delivery tool for me. OTOH, the Mom who works 20 hours per week may well have time to attend a local, in person session. Third, no matter how you deliver the content, you must ensure the presenter has the instructional delivery skills to get his point across. How many times have I seen a presenter read me the %%%% slides, or drone in a voice so small (while looking into the script, not his audiences' eyes) that I cannot hear him (and I still have a normal hearing range)? Fourth, no matter how you present the material, you must ensure the presenter is no less than subject matter competent on his material. How many times have I seen a presenter who said "I just was handed this, let's discover it together." True anecdote: At a commissioner college, a Doctor of Commissioner Service told me with a straight face that all youth in Venturing require a BSA Class III Physical annually! Competency in the material mitigates the risk of passing the baloney Fifth, some tasks mandate hands-on training (let's see... life in the outdoors). Provide it, often, away from the youth. Every youth deserves a TRAINED TO STANDARD leader (note the difference between what I say and what National says). The adult starting a unit should not stumble along learning with the youth. Sixth, modularize and target the hands-on training: Use pre-testing. Build training modules for skill levels, don't do "one size fits all" as our outdoor syllabi (BALOO, WOL (or whatever it is this week) and IOLS now assume. HAVE A MODULE THAT ASSUMES NO EXPERIENCE. OTOH, THE NEW LEADER WHO IS EXPERT... GET HIM ENGAGED WITH HIS UNIT. Seventh, increase the opportunities for adults to train-up away from youth. It does not help leader credibility to play "discovery learning" with his/her training audience. Eighth, we need a way to answer questions: In some of my hobbies, folks have invested in writing online FAQ. That's one path. We have some good subject matter specific training material, but not enough... especially in outdoor skills. We need more and better self-study materials for adults ... focused, narrow topic materials ... "How to select a tent" "Dutch Oven 1" "Walking in the wilderness" (Gee, sounds like the chapters from Colin Fletcher... who is one of my heroes). The internet has radically increased the availability of knowledge. If we must kill a tree for books and pamphlets, charge only the cost of reproduction and distribution. Ninth, and last, we need a way to socialize, integrate, and facilitate further learning: Here, at least we have a tool in the box, when it's used: District Roundtable. I think our District does a good job here, but we work from a unique philosophy: ONE STOP SHOPPING for unit serving Scouters... Each operating committee of the District Committee must staff a table for questions and answers in their lane. The Professionals staff a table to take stuff back to the Service center. Advancement Committee does ELSP approval. OA chapter meets the same night. All 3 programs (Cub/Boy/Venturing) meet the same night. Allow me to summarize: - Commitment from the new volunteer. THIS IS A CURRENT BSA SYSTEMIC SHORTFALL. - Multiple: -- Means of course delivery. -- Opportunities for course delivery. - Competency in presentation skills from the presenter. - Competency in subject matter skills from the presenter. - Hands-on training where appropriate. Pre-test. - Modularize the training, both in skill level and in subject. - Increase the opportunity for hands-on training, so adults can master skills away from the youth. - Improve the follow-on distribution of knowledge. LOWER THE COST OF KNOWLEDGE when it must be distributed through the traditional bricks/mortar of a Scout Shop. - The one and only one SUSTAIN: Socialize and integrate using the existing Roundtable system. Make RT a one stop shop, horizontally and vertically integrated across Scouting in a District. Yes, this means the District, Council, Regional and National training committees have their work cut out for them. They have to find more volunteers to be trainers, train them to and certify them as trainers, QC them as they present,... The short version, Bob? We don't do nearly enough of a good job with the due course adults we bring in the door now, let alone a year over year increase of 62K each year.

Eamonn, ACP&P 33088 and Requirements 33215 provide the HOW of advancement. There's a lot of nuts and bolts in these pubs. SFAIK, no BSA publication shows the blueprint... the inter-relationships of the actual tasks, back through the Methods of Scouting, in turn back to the Aims of Scouting. As I said, my professional background in training came out of the Army's adaptation of Instructional Systems Development. It seems to me reasonable and logical that one tool for the advancement volunteer in scouting at District and Council, and the program unit serving Scouter in the trenches... would be some form of graphic which interrelates and ties the standard advancement program (Scout->Eagle) together. (Definition of Standard advancement program: Those specified tasks in BSA Requirments #33215 which a young man must complete to earn one or more of the six ranks of Boy Scouting). Yes, we've designed the program with huge, huge flexibility. Where, when I was a Scout, you worked T tasks, then 2C tasks, then 1C tasks, now if I do my 3 meals for the patrol in my 3d month as a Scout, I may not have earned TF, but my PL/Instr/TG/SPL/ASM/SM can sign off my 1C cooking requirement. We allow the Scout great discretion in when he chooses to earn the 12 required MBs for Eagle, only mandating a percentage for Star and Life. We allow the Scout to undertake a leadership/service position based on his own skills and desires... anything from Bugler to SPL. The Scout does get the final choice on how he executes the roadmap... but no one ever seems to have explained the logic of the roadmap to Scouters... Does that make sense?

Bottom line, up front: It doesn't have to be 0F for anyone to get hypothermia. The wrong gear, exposure to wet when you need to be dry... you can get yourself or your charges in trouble. True story. I was 15. My parents and I went to Ensenada Mexico for a special break. The hotel had a swimming pool. Swimming pool was 50, outdoor air was 70. I decided to work on my racing starts against competition season. Did about 10, got out of the water. GUESS WHAT? I had chilled myself to the point where I started into hypothermia cycle. Mom and Dad found me shivering under my beach towel. Another true story. At night, I keep the thermostat at 55. Down comforters are a joy . One night a couple weeks back I sat up in the middle of the night and just sat there. A few minutes later, I started shivering, hard. My body was trying to generate heat. Final true story. The battalion Ops officer had broken his leg at Graf; I was the next guy. It was a WINTER Graf trip (Grafenwoehr Training Area is the Army's place where we can shoot major caliber weapons (artillery and tanks) in Germany); the temp was around -10F. I had four layers on my feet (mud/rain boots, insulated field boots, and two layers of wool socks), 3 layers on my legs (wool underpants, pants, outer shell pants), 5 layers on my torso (t-shirt, wool sweater, BDU shirt, field jacket liner, and field jacket) and two layers on my head (winter wool helmet liner, kevlar pot, and a fur lined hood from my field jacket. I had to watch Bravo Battery occupy its position with my Brigade commander. We walked the tank trail together, and lo, I was comfortably warm! Good shoes. Dry socks, and available changes of dry socks. Layers, to insulate, trap air and allow it to warm. Good gloves. A good watch cap. Lots of warm fluids, hot meals (carb and fat heavy) help keep the core warm too! Properly equipped, 0F is not an issue. Improperly equipped, or allowed to get wet (and that includes body perspiration), hypothermia is an icreasing risk. Here's the current National Weather Service wind chill chart, btw... http://www.weather.gov/os/windchill/index.shtml With all that said, your responsibility as WDL is to look at your charges and see if they have the right gear. If they do, take them. If it's a BFO one or more kids are going to be in trouble, pull the plug. Cold can suck a lot of fun out of winter real fast. Remember though: Skiing down the intermediate courses at Winter Park, you can generate a healthy wind chill just by your own velocity ... and people pay to do it!(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

BW, Youth protection. From the post, but with carriage returns... National Camp Standards (which is a safety, liability, and labor law check), Advancement standards, especially at the level of Eagle Scout, youth protection, and commercial use of Scoutings trademarks(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

Please forgive the intrusion... Last night, Kansas City had a rain-ice-snow storm. Today, all metro schools closed. Last night, a classmate of EagleSon was driving home on the Interstate. The roads were bad enough she lost control and went into a spin. She struck a tractor-trailer. You're smart enough to determine the rest. B, I'm on our PTA "buckle up" committee. I don't know yet. This is tragic enough I'm not sure I want to know the deeper particulars for a while. We parents have been dealing with our kids and their loss of a friend this afternoon. This one was sober. Illegal or not, reality is teens drink. Teens do drugs. Not all the children we know are in their full faculties. If a Venturing Crew steps up to the plate and offers a Plan B, they are showing moral courage far beyond their peers. IMO we should be lauding them for what they do, not questioning the wisdom of the project. Are there perhaps better ways to do it? Yes. Are those better ways in place? Usually, no. My thoughts. Please pray for the parents who lost a daughter today.

FScouter, Please don't put words in my mouth. Honestly, I think one of our collective flaws is we don't have enforced compliance on many of the program elements. - Many Americans in 2008 are clueless about how to live in the outdoors. Even so the current BSA training model does not develop adults to operate in the field. Then, in turn, they can ensure the youth teach themselves safe and proper outdoor practices. - How often have we debated "no adding to, no taking from" in advancement here? How often have we heard of units with trained leaders deviating from the standard, and deciding advancement compliance is optional? - How many times have we recommended a youth attend Council JLT/Brownsea/NYLT, and had a response back that "the two weekends interferes with...?" - How many times have we heard from Unit serving Scouters that their UC is the Invisible Man? You want my opinion? The National Council has no idea on what they want for compliance. Worse, they don't have the resources to enforce compliance in all areas. The result is the systemic hodgepodge we get. The National Council (Professionals and volunteers alike) puts its limited resources against things which they feel they must protect. Now you have my opinion.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

Lisa, I like OGE's idea. May I suggest your SM meet with those parents outdoors near a campfire during the next troop meeting. You may have some young people whose families are outdoorsy, and who understand layers, ground insulation, keeping dry, and cold weather bags already. They may be able to participate. Yes, patrol integrity will get broken, but first impressions matter as well. Saying no right out of the starting blocks feels like a bad idea for keeping the young men in the Troop. You will probably have some people who have no clue. For them, inviting the new Scouts to come out for the day, and get field experience training on cold weather operations, will help. There are opportunities to meet site selection and menu planning for T-2-1, even informally! Let us know how the PLC decides to integrate To Ohio_Scouter: Once upon a time, dens didn't migrate to Troops in one fell swoop. Individuals migrated as they hit their 11th birthday. A Troop had to be ready to accept a new Scout anytime of the year. Even these days, if Web A and his Mom/Dad decide Troop 123 meets the need better than Troop 456, you may not get a pre-formed set of kids, rather onesy/twosies... There's no mandated vertical integration of youth from Cubbing to Boying.

Scoutldr, And since units are new only once, let's also denote the Annual charter Agreement, BSA #12-182. Different Councils have different versions of the agreement online, the latest I found by googling is the Ozark Trails Council, dated 2006: http://ozarktrailsbsa.org/downloads/annual_charter_agreement.pdf No mention of compliance by either side. SecretDE, if you're out there, is not one of the sales points the Professional Service makes to potential Partners is that Scouting can be flexible???

hops, There is actually a documented historic model of military readiness. Colonel (retired) Charles Heller, one of the co-authors of America's First Battles wrote it as a US Army War College Stragegic Studies Institute monograph. I won't defend what Mr Clinton did, I will say his actions were within the parameters of the historic model: - Period 1: Deep peacetime (Long serving professionals, virtually no force modernization production, limited research, lots of theoretical training). - Period 2: Mobilization (force expansion, emergency production of existing equipment, training against what we think is the enemy) - Period 3: Operations (force management against ceilings and missions, lots of short-cycle research and production, training derived from results of actual combat lessons learned) - Period 4: Demobilization (force contractions, equipment stockpiling as production lines close, training based on lessons of the war just past). Mr Clinton's tenure coincided with the end of Period 4 for the Cold War and Period 1 (now that we're in it) for the Global War on Terror. Again, I do not condone Mr Clinton's actions (remember the Cruise Missile against the cave? Remember COL Greg Fontenot's comments in the WSJ (his career hit the wall for his integrity)? I simply report they fit the parameters of the model.

Jimmy Carter didn't cause all those deaths. IMO, the deaths in the Desert One fiasco he legitimately should accept responsibility for (and as I recall, he did, on TV). If you want a good top summary of Desert One as seen in DC, read General Powell's autobiography. I entered on Active Duty in the fall of 1978. My first memorial service was the following summer: One of the sergeants in my battalion got drunk at the NCO club one evening, and walked back along the railroad to get to his off-post home. A freight train got him. I was at a CPX a few years later, when the Corps Artillery commander gathered us and told us he'd relieved a battalion commander, his XO, a Battery Commander, HIS XO, his First Sergeant, and the Chief of Firing Battery. It seems the battery had shot 8 rounds out of the impact area at Grafenwoehr. I was on a REFORGER exercise. A FDC team in a sister battalion didn't use two ground guides when backing up their track (front and back). The track rolled over a trooper. I cannot tell you about the Sister Services; the Army constantly works to drill safe operation into its commanders, staffs, and Soldiers. Enough will die or be wounded in action. Many deaths and injuries in training come from not doing the right thing. Gold Winger, can you talk about aviation safety accidents?(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

As I read the colloquy between Beavah, Bob White, and FScouter, I realized there are two major schools of thought on this board: - The first school of thought is each Chartered Partners' Scouting units are franchisees of Scouting, and that there is no flexibility for deviation whatsoever. - The second school of thought is that the Chartered Partners units buy the right to purchase and use Scoutings program materials in the way that makes the most sense to them. There is evidence to support both schools. To me, the biggest piece of evidence I observe is enforced compliance with the program materials. Let's say I am a for-profit franchisee of the XYZ Corporation. I pay them a fee, either flat cash or percentage of sales. In return, they provide me access to trademarks, training, support materials, and inventory. They also provide oversight, in part to protect the interests of their brand name. If I'm screwing up by the numbers, they can strip away my franchise. Think about some local hotel/motel you know. One year it was a Holiday Inn or Ramada (sm). Then, one day, as the place got older, suddenly it had become something like the "Cattlemen's Inn". The franchisee was no longer willing to meet the cost of compliance, and he lost the right to use the trademark. I see mandated compliance in Scouting at four points: National Camp Standards (which is a safety, liability, and labor law check), Advancement standards, especially at the level of Eagle Scout, youth protection, and commercial use of Scoutings trademarks (see the thread on the Rasmussens in Council Relations). The evidence for the second school of thought is observational. As noted above, there are a few areas where the National Council devotes resources to mandated compliance. In all other areas, compliance is voluntary, and some chartered partners (or their units) interpret that as optional. Scouting also devotes relatively limited resources to modelling Best Practices. Many of us here are Wood Badgers. WB is voluntary. Brownsea (resident NYLT) for the youth??? If we tried to put every "next up" SPL through it, our Council camps would be unable to take on the demand! Perphaps my strongest observational evidence for voluntary use/compliance is the Commissioner's Service. What training in it I've taken so far comes down to being an influence for the unit to self-regulate/comply. I've given my thoughts. What are your considered thoughts on the BSA program, compliance, or enforcement? John I used to be an Owl C-40-05

Gotta love the Marketers! Thanks emb...

Why now? Because the quality, fit, and finish of the current de la Renta uniform suck pond scum. The de la Renta uniform is perfectly suitable... for Parlour Scouts.

To answer BW's question... The Scoutmaster is responsible for the implementaiton of the BSA program to the Troop, meeting the Chartered Partner's side of the BSA annual charter agreement. In his program capacity, his is in charge of, responsible for, and accountable for (to the COR of the Chartered Partner) the actions and failures to act of the Assistant Scoutmasters. If he does his job right and well, the SM is a mentor and older friend to the SPL. That's the perfect world. Of course, as we've noted in other threads, all this implies a COR that actually cares about the Charter Agreement beyond one signature a year. Reason for edit: PM from a certain WB bird that tastes like chicken.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

I agree with Beavah. To use another metaphor... your service in the Troop isn't to win the Boston Marathon (26 miles in 3 hours). It's to complete a trek at Philmont (100 miles in 12 days). A bit slower, lots to look at, time to rest, time to reflect. Now, go take that hike with the kids B suggested!

Thanks B. I will say that in the fitness loop, swimming at 2C and 1C starts to cover the gap, and the "master a sport" MBs (Swimming/Cycling/Hiking) help develop a fitness skill on the trail. We have the "age appropriate" matrix in the G2SS. Does it seem really that difficult that the Professionals serving the Boy Scout Division and the National Advancement Committee can't publish a task crosswalk? I'm a graphic learner, I can absorb a process when it's charted out. B, I do like your thoughts on learning to develop a project and learning about leadership before taking it on. Now, I will grant there is a smidgen of project development in Personal Management. Maybe the National Advancement Committee needs to place it in the queue certainly as a pre-requisite to beginning the ELSP, and optimally before earning Life.

I'm not going to focus on the S-T-2 kids for a moment, I'm going to concentrate on the next two layers: Instructors and testers (who in a perfect world are also youth program members): Adults have to influence the young people to become subject matter experts before they pass on a skill. If the instructor cannot demonstrate the task, his credibility is gone... and if that happens more than 1 or two times, it's gone forever, in all skills. I've seen it happen enough to be able to state it as a field observation. Adults have to influence the young people to learn reasonable skill teaching tecniques before sharing a skill. A silent demo with the object hidden, followed by "now go do it yourself" doesn't cut it. Train the trainer... to TRAIN, as well as in the subject matter. Adults have to set reasonable standards for the youth who will sign off tasks. If the 2d Class scout cooking the meals fed his patrol essence of carbon 3 times, did he successfully cook the meal? I think not. We have to influence the youth that they come up with a good idea of "what right looks like." BTW, Beavah is right about his calendar... if the requirement is to cook 3 meals for your patrol (as it is at First Class), then a NSP of 8 boys needs at least 8 months for all to cycle through the task of Patrol Cook!

Sarah, welcome... First step is to find a webhost, as I think Scouter.com does. Go to NetRoster, (top black bar), Then ... below the green bar which says LOCATOR, there is a light yellow bar which says ADD YOUR UNIT. From there... it will push you through a page which isolates your unit to BSA, Then to your Council Then to the type of unit you have.. (Cub Scout Pack in your Case) Then to a fill in menu which lists basic contact data. That will get you databased here. IF YOU WANT A WEBSITE, many units work through someone's ISP to be a webhost, or they procure a domain name and a webhosting service for a token fee per year. Then, they build AND MAINTAIN (that's the tough part) content. I'll say it again... maintaining the content is the tough part. Stale content means the group doesn't care. There are a suite of rules for web content. KEY POINT: Do not let a youth member be personally identifiable! Here are my home Council's rules, which I think are very close to the National standards: http://hoac-bsa.org/ae_links/HOAC_internet_guidelines.pdf Hope all this helps. YIS John

BW, Units can and will have varying degrees of effectiveness with the existing program. Quality of leader training, willingness to use, quality of support from the District and Council all influence the final product. Final effectiveness in the unit, though, is not why I posted, nor why I asked my questions. My point is, systemically, the program appears to have gaps or cutoffs in the development of tasks. My issue is how do volunteers work through the system work to be agents of systemic change? - If ropework is important enough to be mandated at S-T-2-1, why does it become optional for S-L-E? Why isn't it important enough to be mandatory? - If anti-bullying was important enough to be force-fitted to the 2008 requirements (with no grace periods this time) at S-T-2-1, why didn't the National Advancement Committee go the rest of the way and push this stuff into FL or PM MB's? - How do volunteers and Professionals in the field give feedback which results in change up the line? After all, feedback is a gift, as is active listening (in this case, reading).

All the talk of FCFY/FCE got me to thinking... In the Army, I took Instructor Training. Learned how to present content to students. I also took Systems Approach to Training ... which was how to develop information into content. In the civilian learning models world, Systems Approach to Training I believe is called Instructional Systems Development. You determine an outcome you want a person to have, and you work through a process to determine what needs training, how its trained, where its trained, and what proficiency standard it needs to be trained to. So, I look at what we in Scouting do, and I'm seeing some major league disconnects: WE SAY... The Outdoor Method is a major tool and the principal program delivery vehicle of Scouting. It supports all our AIMS. At S-T-2C-1C, we have ropes and knots at S-6, T-4a, 4b, 2C-NOTHING, and 1C-7a, 7b, 7c and 8a. Thereafter, we drop the subject for S-L-E. Pioneering is not on the Eagle Required List, and Camping MB has no requirements for knots or lashings. Let's take another example: At T-2C-1C, we have food and cooking at T-3, 2C at 2e, 2f, and 2g, and 1C at 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, and 4e. Thereafter, a module of Camping MB (requirement 8) requires cooking, but we dropped Cooking MB from the Eagle Required List. Now we have those wonderful new requirements for anti-bullying that National implemented on Jan 1. BTW, National has yet to update the BSA REquirements #33215 webpages on their site to include these. Hello, National... keep your content current! Has anyone looked at Family Life and Personal Fitness Merit Badges to integrate the new requirements further up the life cycle of the young man? Down in the unit trenches, we have a lot of volunteers who are charged with using the program materials National provides. Those leaders, and the Scouts they serve, deserve the very best support possible. This should include Standards, even as models. Right now, the standard is "Do the requirement, no more, no less." That leaves a lot of discretion, which may be the desired goal. After all, a 12 year old talking about the Constitution for Citizenship in the Nation will have a different knowledge base than a 17 year old who put CIN off to very late in the day. It seems to me the folks in Irving, who get some very big dollars from National fees, profits from Supply Corporation, and the National FOS campaign should produce world-class support materials which which clearly demonstrate how A relates to B from the time a young man is a Tiger to when he (Venturing he/she) ages out at 18 or 21. From what I see, it's not necessarily there.

Brent, I don't have an issue of adults modeling behaviors. There's no reason at all why one Scouter can't say "I'll buy", another "I'll cook," and two others "We'll do cleanup, help prep, and site select." We're trying to get the kids to learn interactive cooperation and thought process. I have a tremendous objection with calling ourselves a Patrol and wearing a Patrol patch, among other things. My reason involves an accusation made against me by someone, and spread in my community. I believe that is why we have the stricture in the Uniform Guide that adults shall not wear articles designate for youth (which patrol patches are...). Let's be the adults we are. Returning to mandatory training: GIGO. Garbage in will yield garbage out. If anyone in the food chain wants mandatory training, that person has to do things needed to make the training worth the students while. Othwise, the old adage will come true: Money talks, bu##### walks. Bad mandatory training will eventually result in an increased adult flight from Scouting.

emb, Are you saying there is one and only one edition of the Forum Guide? BS Division rolls out a different RT Guide annually. I think ditto for CS division.

If you like to talk to tomatoes... If a squash can make you smile... If you like to waltz with potatoes... Up and down the Produce aisle... You should be President. I'm sorry folks, but from what I'm seeing, this silly season has to beat almost any since Andrew Jackson ran!

Jeez... Let's see... The BOY SCOUT DIVISION makes its RT guide a bin item. The CUB SCOUT and VENTURING DIVISIONS make their RT/Forum guides $$ items. BTW, has anyone noticed that BSA rolls the themes over on a 3 year cycle? Once you have 3 years of material, you don't need to get it again! A little original thought in Irving might be nice... OTOH, repackaging is cheap, and someone will buy it... Hey OGE, how much structural re-write has there been in those 5 editions, and how much is "happy to glad" or "'Times New Roman' to 'Arial'" font???(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

OK, I'll speak as a soldier... I can say categorically here in the United States, a 17-20 year old soldier of the US Army cannot have a beer, let alone stronger drink, on a military installation... unless he wants to see his company commander and get non-judicial punishment. There are a very few exceptions to this, usually involving the anniversary of the units founding (Organization Day). It usually requires a battalion commander to go see his commanding general. I do not know the current policy for the Sister Services, nor do I know policy in Korea or Germany. The last time I checked, the CENTCOM AOR was dry for all ages. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What EagleSon does is my business, and his moms. I pray I've raised him right, and that when the time comes, he'll enjoy the pleasures of adulthood, including physical love and alcohol, responsibly. I am not allowed to be responsible for someone eles' child, unless I see them where I can call 911 and ask for assistance. If I can get a drunken teen off the road, be it voluntarily (calling parents/peers/Safe Ride) or calling 911, I will. The object is to remove a hazard for the rest of us.