ScoutMythBuster

If you have a boy removed from your troop for violence and you find out he has joined a neighboring troop do you have a moral obligation to give the new SM a "heads up"?

A good leader does not need to know everything. All he or she needs is the abilty to find out the answer and the good sense to realize that he or she does not know everything. And BSA training is so redundant. And the fact that certain training must be done through BSA, I know the reasoning but it does get rediculous. (for example, I was a certified military range instructor with Marines, I took the NRA Instructor course to teach both adults and youth. I was a youth instructor with the Young Marines for 4 years before I joined BSA as a volunteer. I had to retake the entire course again for BSA, and I mean the same course number ... the same exact course!!! Can anybody explain the logic there?)

Last Year somebody made all of my parent s Scouts and all of my Scouts parents...then lost all of the hardcopies. For an new CC and CM, can you imagine how that went over?

The leaders I have are all friends, the problem was the previous leadership left such a bad impression on so many levels people are afraid to step in. I have my 2 ASM/ CA and slowly they are becoming more comfortable to take the lead. I feel, at times, thye are trigger shy and don't want to make a decission. Last year, in the beginnig I was a control freak. I inherited a Pack with 3 kids and a Troop with 4 (see my problem). No trained adults, including me.Between June and August, I recruited and arranged trainings. By Septemeber we had a fully trained leadership. By October, the Pack was at 21, the Troop at 5. I planned everything, and did about 95% of the work. My Treasure/ Scribe along with the CC handles 85% of all my paperwork now, I just approve things and I am teaching the Assistants what to do. My Den Leaders are now doing their own Den Plans and discussing the at our Leader's meetings. This year, I am actually able to float and observe each Patrol and Den during the meetings. Last year was very stressful, so far this year I feel liberated.

We had 3 Packs in our area with very low memberships and no Troops a year ago. In a year, we have the 3rd largest Pack and the 4th largest Troop in our District. We are the Pack and Troop with 100% Trained Leadership. I have great Leaders now, that really do not need much more than a coordinator and some guidenance hear and there.

So, I know it sounds like I am overwhelmed but I'm not. I have a great support system and as a group we are starting to reach out and help some of the other shrinking packs in our area.

NJCubScouter, I agree. They don't care about anything but the almighty $$. I live near center city Philly and I have 2 Scout Camps 1 hour away (Hart and Delmont)but for BSA resident Camp we have to go out to Resicca Falls. Hart and Delmont is near the center of the Council but the more wealthy people live out towards Ressica.So Hart and Delmont are no longer a viable option. They have also shut down Treasure Island with no definite plans to reopen it.

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/430-016_WB.pdf This is the application for the National Outdoor Challenge Award. Yes the national website is very confusing. The information for this Award can be found here http://www.scouting.org/jamboree/sitecore/content/home/boyscouts/adults/awards.aspx

National Outdoor Badges? http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/BoyScouts/Youth/Awards/NOA.aspx

Talk about confusing, In the beginning of 2010 we were introduced to the Geocaching Merit Badge. Go to a Private Company's Website (Geocaching.com) for information but there is NO Merit Badge Booklet. I believe its the only MB without a booklet.

City bans have a huge impact... I had parents that would not sign their kids up for a group that "the city was kicking out of the city" That was how some people interpretted the Philadelphia vs Cradle of Liberty. Big cities, like Philadelphia run very negative smear campaigns. Many people saw the BSA as Public Enemy # 1 when the suit first started. Here we are 7 months (give or take) after the verdict and I still hear Boy Scouts are still around.

And NJCubScouter, believe it or not people are kicked out for it, same sex and opposite sex couples. I knew a gunny who was kicked out because him and his wife were into kinky swinging and it came to light. So yes, they prosecute it both ways. (no pun intended)

Well, a few years ago I took over a Pack where besides me was the CC and CM. They did everything for almost 30 years. When became CM, I did recruit and managed to get a committee, DL, ADL as well as 2 ACM. Later that year I started the Troop. with 5 boys and 2 ASM. Also started a Committee. So, I do have people in my direct groups as back ups. The group I started helping in as the CA/Webelos DL now has a Wolf DL, and I am training a Bear DL. That group I am helping reestablish themselves. See, I take 2 boys there as DC. Since I dont want to drive home and turn around and come right back I started helping to pass the time. Again, this is a short time gig as I help them get back where they need to be. There are so many Packs and Troops fighting for numbers and territories people forget that it is about the kids. Since the 2 Packs I work with are within a half a mile of each other I convinced my DE that our territorial lines are the nights we meet. At first the other group fought the idea but when both groups saw record number of new scouts they saw my intentions.

And a Family Run District is a bad thing. That is what we are going through in my District. We are getting people who are younger and fairly new to scouting (under 10 years). Sometimes you just have to clean house ...

You hear alot about the military's "don't ask don't tell policy". I have personally seen people discharged for violation of UCMJ (Uniformed Code of Military Justice) policy for "being homosexual". This is how the media have spun this. Technically they are discharged for violation of the UCMJ. Nowhere in the UCMJ does it outlaw homosexuality.

The charge is based on UCMJ Sec. 925, Art. 125. (a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense. Basically translated means anything outside of man+woman, procreation meant sex (if you need more exact description of this talk to your parents, lol) is a no no and punishable.

I know this is a little off topic but this is how the media spins a rule that restricts everybody and makes it about 1 specific group.

Does National Care? On the most part, I say yes.

When I have found things that need to be addressed I have tried talking to my DE, SE and my District / Council Committee. They tend to smile and agree with you or tell you how things won't change. For example, getting applications processed or having Trainers input Training Records as soon as the Training is complete. Almost always you get the excuses but no resolution. Recently I also discovered that National is more inclined to change program content or operation protocols when a volunteer Scouter calls in rather than a Proffessional Scouter calls.

National has gone so far as to create an Innovation Team to investigate our concerns and the feasability of our ideas in regards to program, operations, record keeping, ect.

Still, all change is slow coming and by time it happens the change maybe obsolete.

I love hearing eberybody's thoughts on subjects like this. Especially when so many of you have had similar situations. After the situation happened I went home and sent out an email describing the events of the evening to my DE, unit and District Commissioners and my SE. (I did not BCC - I CC, so everybody knew who knew) My DE actually became upset that I did not just contact him. He said now the SE knew we had to take it seriously. I did not think there was any other way to handle the situation. At some point, we were asked to give them yet another chance because they did not understand repercussions of their actions. On a side note, 2 weeks after the Scout and father was removed, the boy attacked his teacher and the father sued the school system over his expellsion. Yes, I agree it was a hopeless situation.

The funny thing is, I spend alot of time with my family. The Pack I am a Den Leader im, I am there anyway because my son is the Bear Den Chief (I don't want to be the Den Leader in his Den). My Pack and Troop meet the same nightWith a half overlay, the Pack meets 7-8 and the Troop meets 630 to 730, it's in the same building just different classrooms on the same floor. It would be really taxing but I have great leaders that make it possible. The problem is, they dont mind be Den Leaders, Committee people and ASM / CAnobody wishes to be in charge.

The YP policy states:

■Two-deep leadership.

Two registered adult leaders or one registered leader and a parent of a participant, one of whom must be 21 years of age or older, are required on all trips and outings. The chartered organization is responsible for ensuring that sufficient leadership is provided for all activities.

■No one-on-one contact.

One-on-one contact between adults and youth members is not permitted. In situations that require personal conferences, such as a Scoutmaster's conference, the meeting is to be conducted in view of other adults and youths.

And next time I'll make it more general, good point. The reason I brought it up a year later is with a new scout year beginning I thought it was a good time to do a leadership evaluation. You know, make a bad thing a learning experience.

Did I mention I am also a Trainer? I am an insomniac with ADD. I guess I hit the "head" in the wee hours of the morning.

Believe it or not, I have people in my area with more hats than me...

Ok, I'm in Philly. The city LOST!! They are still trying and wants the Supreme Court to now hear there arguments. (Guess they never heard of Boy Scouts vs Dale?)

During the trials our numbers dropped off and this is our first recruitment since the verdict that told the city to back off Cradle of Liberty; so far I have signed up 22 new Cubs and 4 new Boy Scouts. Other groups around here are reporting the similar numbers.

Solicitor Diaz said, "In my administration, we will not subsidize discrimination." I love this statement. Cradle of Liberty maintains the building themselves, pays all of their own utilities and even pays for private trash collection. The building, built in 1929 at 22nd and Winter Sts at the request of the city's "fathers". The building was built and paid for by the Scouts and turned over to the city with the understanding that the Scouts would be allowed to remain in it rent-free "in perpetuity." So, they were being subsidized because they built the building on city land, at the request of the city and was paying the standard city honorarium of $1 per year.

By time the lawsuit had ended, city workers, police and firefighters had turned against the mayor and the solicitor. I remember one person asking if they can't change the Armed Forces Policy why attack the Boy Scouts?

How do I think they affect hings on the ground? As with anything in a political type atmosphere, it depends on how you spin it.

When everything started here with the lawsuit this is what the papers printed:

...citing "rising violence and other urban ills daily threatening Philadelphia's teens," some community leaders said it made no sense to evict the Boy Scout. Also, some questioned the objectivity of city solicitor Romulo L. Diaz, Jr., himself openly gay, in moving to evict the Scouts - arguing that the city could lose $62 million in federal funds with the eviction because of the Support our Scouts Act of 2005 and Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act.

The sad thing is, we elected (as a city) Mayor Street twice and Mayor Nutter twice. And in a city that is finacially dying this is how they chose to spend there time and our money.

Ok, alot of Councils have Data Entry concerns... Training Records for adults take forever to go into the system. Sometimes I have seen applications take 3 to 4 months to process. An idea came up last year and I have been talking topeople about expanding Internet Advancement to allow for Adult Training to be netered in online like we do for the youth advancement. You would then scan and attach the "Scanned Copy of the Training Card" electronically for transmission to the registrar. Similar with applications, enter through an online, secured program; just like internet rechartering. The only difference here is, you would get a tracking number to write on the hard copy. The hard copy would get handed in with the appropriate fees and then all the registrar has to do is quickly verify the info.

I know it puts more work on the volunteer but at least stuff is being entered in a timely fashion.

What are your thoughts?

I live in an urban area. We have alot of boys interested and in need of all of the positive things we Scouters have to offer. Problem is, not enough adult Scouters.

I am trying to see if this is just a larger city problem or does it hold true everywhere? I am a Cubmaster with my own Pack, a Scoutmaster with my own Troop. I also run Webelos in another group that only has 2 adults for leaders.

Sorry, yes we do meet in a school. That is why we have a knife ban at our meeting place. So when we do Whittling with our Cubbies we use an another facility.

As for the Youth Protection Part, the offending parent cornered the Scout he screamed at and basically, for a few moments managed to get himself alone with the Scouts.

The next day was even more fun! The parent went to the Scout Executive to argue his son's case... didn't get to far.(This message has been edited by ScoutMythBuster)

Sometimes American Made is not only cheaper but is of better quality. Check this website out. http://www.inquiry.net/uniforms/bdu.htm

About a year ago we had a Scout (Tenderfoot) who had his Totin Chit removed because of constant knife violations. The Scout and the parent was counseled a few times, but the father insisted that his son had the "right" to use his knife wherever and whenever he wanted to. For the safety of all he was told the rules again. Within a week, the Scout decided to pull his knife out and wave it at the other Scouts in his Patrol while the Scoutmaster's back was turned. The Patrol Leader calmly told him to put it away and had the APL get the Scoutmaster's attention. First thing the Scoutmaster and the Assistant SM did was quietly request the knife and returned it to the father and said that there was a no knife policy at Patrol Meetings and we would discuss it later.

The parent flew down the hall and berated the Patrol Leader and blamed him for the entire incident. Embarrassed, he said nothing but the other Boy Scouts brought the incident out in the open. The PL was assured he did the right thing. And after a Committee and Leader Meeting, the youth and his father was removed.

As I said, it's been a year and I was just wondering if we as leaders could have prevented the incident? Or was the father's reinforcement of the Scout's incorrect behaviour dooming any positive outcome?

I always took this requirement at face value. Invite someone to join or rejoin. If the scout says he asked somebody to join or rejoin I feel the need to trust him. This is one of those things that are hard to prove. Plus, if your program is good enough they are already bragging about all the cool things that they are doing, inadvertantly inviting them to come see.

I would probaly say to trust the scout's word that he invited somebody and leave it at that.

That is definetly a new one for me... if you get another copy send us one. I'm curious to see it. Don't really see the point but I am still curious.

Oak Tree, yes I see your point. Do you think that a meeting or two before the elections or appointments by the SPL to have a SM Minute discussing electing friends because they are friends vs electing for the well being of the troop / patrol? You are not trumping the election, nor are you directly influencing. You are just speaking on the importance of the right person in the right job.

And as for BrentAllen's statement "the Troop has the responsibility of getting the Scout to First Class". I don't know if I fully agree. The Troop is responsible for presenting the material, having adequate activities for the Scout to practice and learn. But being Responsiblefor getting the Scout to First Class I feel it is still ultimately on the Scout. I have had years where we offered everything and the Scout showed up for nothing. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink.

Councils being more restrictive is different than a a policy being written to be compliant to local laws. If a local council says that 12 year old cannot earn the Shotgun Shooting MB because the local law says you must be 16 to fire a shotgun. That is compliance to local authority. Saying all Boy Scouts must have a certain hair cut, I know this is a ridiculous example, that would be a local Council Restriction. The sheathed knife thing is usually a local knife ordinance based on lwas regarding blade size, ect.

Jet526, I agree with you. School responsibilities must come first and if a POR is going to interfere the Scout should understand his or her own limitations (used both in case we have any Venturers here).

Also, even though your Troop has 43 Scouts (which is great) not all do. Some inner city Troops have dwindled over time, while others are disproportionate in rank (ei top heavy with few younger Boy Scouts or the opposite). There is an area in one of the Districts I have visited where they have only 9 Packs averaging 15 kids each. In this same District there are only 3 Troops. Of the 3 Troops, 1 has all older Scouts and prefers to sit back and wait for the cubs to come to them, that's why they are all older scouts. The other 2 troops are a year or 2 old, with much younger scouts. These 2 actively take interest in the Packs for hope of recruitment and to help the boys gain experience. I agree, demographics could cause 1 group to see things differently in regards to POR. I guess, fluctuating numbers can make traditional decision making unrealistic.