silver-shark

My apologies. I hadn't read jerryz's post in a few days and had completely forgotten about the 3 month probation part of the deal.

The only thing I would have suggested differently might have been for him to be excluded from the next outing.

I too am pleased that the police were not brought into the situation, however, had this occurred on the way to school, they surely would have been.

My frustration last night had more to do with parents blaming ADD or ADHD for their childs behavior. I've already had plenty of that this week. I believe that either they control their behavior, or it will control them.

Thanks for bringing me back to reality Barry.

Ed

You and I cannot go out and pull a knife, a gun or any other deadly weapon out on someone without some serius consequenses. Why should it be different for a child? Aren't they are bound by our same laws.

Punishing a kid that that has some serious problems (or he wouldn't be in counciling to begin with) and stopping a future threat, are 2 completely different things.

While this might not be something to be concerned about with some boys, the behavior is still wrong. Pulling a knife on someone, whether as a joke or not, is wrong.

Just because this boy has ADD, ADHD. or whatever, doesn't make it right or OK.

Jerryz, you are not doing this boy or his family a favor by sweeping it under the rug. My experience with this type behavior, which includes other scouts, 2 sons with ADD, and 1 son with ADHD tells me that this boy now sees no, or little, consequence for this type behavior, if both you, his SM, and his father can explain it away.

I guarantee you, his outburst/plea for attention will be louder and possibly more dangerous the next time.

God help you when it happens!(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

That's what I thought eamonn.

ss

"When traveling to and from an area, regional, or national Boy Scout activity or any Venturing event under the leadership..."

You will note that the words "area", "regional", and "national", are not capitalized in this statement. They do not pertain to a specific type of event but rather their dictionary definition. Nothing more.

I have heard of nothing specifically called an Area Activity, or a Regional Activity, although I have heard of National Activities such as Jamborees.

The wording doesn't specifically state District, Council, or National Activities, but these all take place within areas, regions, and the nation don't they?(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

I assume you're referring to used uniforms.

If so, they can be found at garage sales, auctions, eBay, Goodwill Stores, Salvation Army Thruft Stores, and the like.

Good Luck!

Exactly my point...

Thanks for the clarification Bob.

Why wouldn't a District event be concidered to be an area or regional event Fat Old Guy?

You're not making sense... It seems that you're just looking for something to complain about that doesn't exist.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

I don't believe the policy is bad when interpreted correctly Fat Old Guy.

When we look at Rule 4 above, what we see is that a 16 yaer old, with certain restrictions of course, may drive to a Boy Scout or Venturing Activity as long as there is an adult leader that is at least 21 years of age on the trip.

In addition, it states that they can drive to "area, regional, or national" events. I don't see anywhere where it states that these 16 year olds cannot drive to a district event.

The intent of this policy is to avoid having Boy Scouts or Venturers driving themselves to events with no adult supervision, even though they may be able to participate without that adult participation at all with an approved plan.

This seems very reasonable to me.

caddmommy

These are good questions, but you have the actual details a little confused.

First, Boy Scouts are up until the 18th Birthday. After that they can become an Assistant Scoutmaster not a Junior Scoutmaster, with a Boy Scout Troop, or join a Venturing Crew.

A Junior Scoutmaster is a boy at least 16 years of age in the troop, and does not count as an adult leader for the 2 deep rule.

Even though they are an ASM at 18, there still must be at least one adult 21 or over on an activity that involves the troop in addition to a second adult of at least 18. Two deep leadership.

The Boy Scout boys don't have to have an adult accompany them on patrol activities, as long as they have a plan approved by their SM, who must be at least 21 years of age. But, if one adult goes, there MUST be a second to meet the 2 deep leadership rule.

The Venturing advisors must be at least 21 years of age, and also don't have to accompany the VCs boys if there is an approved plan by the Advisor. But, if one goes, a second MUST go.

I hope this clarifies it some for you.

ss

Mr. farrell

What you are talknig about is exactly what I hope our boys move towards in the coming year now that some have been to Council JLT.

Keep up the good work!

FOG

I agree with you about the lockback knives and have heard the same things from trainers. I still recomend them.

Case is the brand that I bought for my 2 scouts, but agree with the others that you list that I have heard of.

I generally carry a good pocket knife with one blade, and have a separate multi tool to tale care of the few other things that I need it for.

The worst thing a parent can do is skimp on the quality of the knife. That is where most injuries occur. This may run them $30 to $40 or more, but is well worth it.

Stainless steel blades are good for boys. They don't hold an edge as long, but are good for when boys put them away wet occasionally, and they will.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

I'm still trying to figure out what your point is Fat Old Guy.

People are penalized or punished every day for behaving stupidly. If they weren't, they'd think they could act just as stupidly again tomorrow.

A thought just ran through my mind of a Fat Old Guy being put into a squad car under the charge of reckless endangerment, still screaming "but officer... I just wanted to see if it would float..."

I've never heard of anyone beating a charge with the defense of "sorry... I guess I just acted stupidly... I won't do THAT again..."

Bob

Nicely stated...

Yet again...

No, FOG, what this boy is guilty of is using a dangerous woods tool as a play thing, and in an extremely inappropriate manner at that.

If he has a TOTIN' CHIP, he already learned, then signed the card acknowledging HIS responsibilities for carrying and using this type tool.

He chose to either ignore or break the first 4 responsibilities on the back of his card in this instance.

Laurie

In an instance where we have taken a scouts TC away, he not only has to retake the course, but teach it to other scouts before he will get a new one. Then we make a recomendation to the Committee as to what further action we feel is appropriate. Possibly suspension, and/or probation.

Additionally, the scout needs to bring his parent to me to ask for his knife back. This makes a big impression on the young man.

acco40

I have to admit that I find your ban of the knives at the next 2 campouts to be a refreshing new look at the issue, but somewhat agree with Hunt that an overall collective ban might not get the impact we would be looking for. But, if it was done at the patrol level, with the guilty party's patrol, that would give the team impact that FOG is talking about. Something new to ponder for a recomendation to the Committee.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

Barry

You hit the nail on the head when you talk about training for the scouts. This is a huge reason that we have had success with our VP and troop since it's inception.

Of the 3 regular patrols that we have, all 3 have at least 2 scouts that have participated in Troop JLT, and at least 1 scout that has help run it. Additionally, one of these Regular Patrols had 2 boys go to Council JLT last month.

The VP boys are also the trainers at every Troop Meeting. This keeps them involved with the rest of the troop.

The VP boys also camp with the troop and do their own adventures in addition to what the troop is doing. They cook some great meals by themselves as an example to the rest of the boys as to what can be done, and many times still help out the younger boys even with that.

We truly have some exceptional, caring, older scouts in our troop, and are very fortunate to have a way to retain them with the VP program. But, as you said, it might not be for every troop. It truly takes a lot of work from everyone, especially the trainers of the boys, who happen to be the ASMs, myself included, because the SM has never done it himself.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

Barry

Thanks for the words of support.

When we first talked to the boys about the type of VP they wanted to have, maturity level in the group was something that was very important to them. Therefore, THEY decided that to be a member you had to be at least 13 and Life, 14 and Star, or 15 and FC. This helps us a lot. They are now concidering other things, such as Previous PL, Troop JLT, and other things that show more experience in the troop.

These might help some of those struggling with this process, but the most important part is the boy's input into THEIR program. Now they have a vested interest in the success of the group.

Barry

I agree with most of what you said. The thing being that since we started a Venture Patrol within the troop about 6 months ago, we haven't lost any more older scouts.

The older scouts are now in charge of planning meetings, and training the younger ones during the skills portion of the troop meeting. We tell them that with priveledge comes responsibility. Soon they will be training the PLs of the Regular Patrols how to plan meetings. At that point each patrol will plan 3 months of program per year.

They have been able to look at their higher adventure type activities, maybe planning 4 per year as the program advises, and that is the key as I see it. using the Varsity/Venture Program Features for them along with the regular Troop Program Features.

All in all, it seems to be working for us so far, but we insist that the boys continue to give back to the troop, and it beats the alternative of losing them to a Venturing Crew and losing their leadership.

I'll bite.

Agreeing with rules and abiding by rules are 2 completely separate issues.

I have absolutely no problem with anyone that can:

1. Abide by the rules.

2. Treat other individuals in a civil manner.

3. Make me laugh.

4. Work with and love kids.

P.S. I almost forgot, it would be great if they could make coffee, and it would be even better if they would set a cup outside my tent in the morning, but maybe that's just dreamin'... I'm still trying to train boys to do this but they don't seem to be too motivated.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

Merlyn,

I have to agree that I can't find any specific explaination of the ban on avowed homosexuals in the typical boy materials. There is a very good reason for that. Look at the following essay written MANY years ago by the renowned author and Scouter, William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt, entitled, "The Game of Scouting

"In fact, the basic principle in Scouting is "Learning by Doing." There is nothing negative in it. There is no "Go up in the attic and see what Johnny is doing and tell him he mustnt!" There are no "Donts." Scouting does not say "Dont rob birds nests," but "Find out about birds." It does not say "Dont cut down trees," but instead "Help save the trees." That is talking boy languagestimulating, not prohibiting."

This style of presentation to the boys has been working for over 90 years. Pages 376 and 377 of "The Boy Scout Handbook", don't tell us that homosexuality is wrong. That would be a negative. What it does say is to have a healthy sexual relationship AFTER you become married. It goes on to talk about their "Responsibility to Young Women", and themselves. And, do ask questions of your parents, guardians, or religious leaders.

As in many instances, the BSA doesn't have a whole lot of negative policy written UNTIL they are forced to, except as they pertain to health and safety issues.

And, as I have stated in other threads, morally straight is morally straight. There is no room in the program for the discussion of any sexual behaviors, it's as simple as that.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

Zahnada,

Unfortunately, this topic will resurface every time that the BSA is portrayed as a discriminating group of gay bashing homophobes. It's as simple as that.

Eventually, organizations like the United Way, and the Pew Charitable Trust (I have to admit that I don't know who they are), and probably some others, will go too far and will wake the sleeping dog called the silent majority. That hasn't happened yet but is getting closer every day, and that dog WILL bite them when it is awakened.

At some point in time, the banter you mention WILL turn into a rallying cry for that sleeping dog when it is backed too far into a corner.

I've got to go along with Rooster on this one. I find it mostly to be right on the mark of how I feel.

As we continue to look at things like the Constitution in an increasingly more liberal light, we are getting further and further from what the writers actually intended.

Laurie,

Sounds like he's doing just fine, or maybe better.

A gentle reminder from time to time about looking at the SC and FC requirements will probably reveal to him that he's further along with them than he thinks as well.

Good Luck !

Ed,

I may have given you the wrong impression.

All of the Troop Buck Account money goes into the boy's/son's/brother's account. I'm still paying my own way for everything, as it should be.

The problem we have is in getting the correct amount of parent involvement. For instance this Friday (July 4th) is our biggest fundraiser of the year. We run the concessions for our town's celebration. At this event we have 2 main boothes (a minimum of 12 people each) set up for soft drinks, popcorn, burgers and dogs, soft pretzels, cotton candy, you know, the works... We also have 6 smaller boothes (minimum of 3 people each) set up for just soft drinks and bottled water. Then there are the mobile wagons (unlimited number) for the boys (minimum of 2 boys each) to make the rounds to those that don't want to lose their spot in the grass for the show. Then we have our set up crews and our tear down crews. Then some people will need breaks at various times so we have to have extra people for that too...

You probably see where I'm going with this, our only limit to how much the troop will make is based on the amount of participation that we have.

Last year was the first time that we ran this event and we cleared over $3000.00 that day, and we're in a smallish town about 15 miles from downtown Indy which is where many people in town go to see fireworks. We used all of the money from that event for a new troop trailer. We knew that we were increasing the size of the troop this year from 28 to 48 scouts. Had this been divided out per person working, my son would have recieved about $450.00 since he, my wife and myself all worked the event.

With additional people this year (we're doubling the size of the operation this year) we expect for this total cleared to exceed $8000.00 !

This is sorely needed by many of the boys, since we are going to Sea Base next year. The 24 boys going there will have an operating budget of around $1200 to $1400 next year that they SHOULD be trying to earn. Many aren't. The remainder of boys are at about $400 for the year if they want to go to everything they are eligible for.

In the past, nobody can think of a time when a boy that really NEEDED the money didn't have at least 1 parent present, but if they did, I would suggest that since we have a SM and an ASM with no children in the troop, that we break them out a share to go to needy boys in the troop. I'm sure they would be thrilled to do it. Even the families that have 2 boys in the troop show up with 2 parents and a qualified sibling to work. They know that the harder their family works, the easier it will be on their family.

As far as the slacker boys that don't show up, or without their parents because the parents are willing to fund their son's scouting program, why should they get the same as the family that worked their tail off for the troop?

Also, as Eamonn said, when it come to popcorn, wreathes, and Christmas Trees sales, when the parent takes an order form to work, thus helping the scout to make more for homself and the troop (the same 20% goes into the troop for these as well) he's getting more $ in his TBA. Why should this be any different?

First off... Parent participation is crucial to the success of many of our fundraisers, and their has been a problem getting it in the past. (We're still the Baby Sitters of America to many parents.)

We start with a signup sheet to see who we can get first. If too many parents sign up, which I can only remember happening once, we limit them first to those that need the extra money the most, along with those that actually know how to run the event, then in a rotating manner to make it as even as possible.

We don't care if it's a scout, a parent, or a qualified sibling, everyone gets a share of the 80% of profit that the boys get for their Troop Buck Accounts. (20% of all fundraisers go to the troop.)

And for those of you wondering about the qualified siblings, they usually seem to be sisters that are in the GSUSA, and these girls repeatedly out work our boys by a huge margin.

I'm not trying to be a wise guy or anything, I'm just curious...

How many hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars are we talking about here across the nation, divided by the millions of scouts and scouters?

Not that I'm complaining, but I've never heard where our extra $3.00 a year to national is going. Are they already trying to head this off at the pass? I'm sure they didn't just all of a sudden get a 45% increase in their cost of doing business, and if it had to go up another few dollars a year next year, is that really a problem?

Just curious...

Everyone wants to make such a big panicky deal out of what the United Way has done for scouting in the past and how devastating the loss of their funding is.

Well, $400,000.00 from them, plus $100,000.00 from Pew Charitable Trusts, divided by 87,000 scouts, only works out to about a dime a week per scout.

Am I missing something here? Is this really such a big problem? Are there really any boys in our troops that couldn't afford an extra dime or so a week? It sure seems like the BSAs stance on morallity is the right thing to do for the price.