Krampus

Last camp out the boys asked if they could explore. The PLs said yes and asked the SPL for the ground rules. SPL asked the SM. Basically it was this: Stick together as a patrol, everyone has their ten essentials (PL checks), you give a start and return time and route you are taking, any issues on the route you stay put and the S&R team will find you. They were given "out of bounds" areas. Other than that, enjoy. The adults sat at base camp watching them climb the rocks (think scene in the Eiger Sanction where George Kennedy is watching Clint Eastwood's team climb). One new dad asked, "Isn't it dangerous sending them out without adults? There's snakes and other dangers out there." The reply he got was, "Tommy burned his hand in camp. John nearly stepped on a rattler on his way to the head last night walking along a concrete path. Bobby nearly ate a peanut (allergic) that killed him. Naw, they're less likely to get injured out there than they are in camp." 40 Scouts left camp. 40 Scouts returned to camp...all on time or EARLY. No injuries. No mishaps. Somewhere in Irving a BSA lawyer was changing his underwear.

ROFL....yeah, the "accommodation" of kids over the last 20 years is astounding. My kid's teacher sent an email saying my daughter was several weeks late with an assignment and, if she didn't get it in soon, it would be a zero. I asked, "When was it due?" She said, "January 13th." I said, "Mark it a zero and she will learn to get it in on time next time." The teacher's reply? "But I want to give her every chance possible!" My reply? "She hasn't missed a day of school since the New Year. She's had 2.5 months. That's PLENTY of chances. Mark it a zero please." Ya just have to shake your head some times.

No registration means no inspection too? We have both in Texas, yet you see some pretty natty trailers on the road. I ride a good half mile behind them just in case.

Same here, except ours requires her son to text her every day at breakfast, lunch and dinner. Our guys told him that electronics had to be off and, if discovered on they would be taken and given back at the end of the trip. PL found the kid texting, politely told him to stop, he didn't and the phone was confiscated by the PL and given back for the ride home. Before doing so the PL told him to send the following: "Dear Mom, I am not allowed to text during camp outs. As a Scout I must be obedient and obey the rules. The rule is there for me to become more independent and grow in to an adult. I will text you again on the way home. I love you." The PL told me what he did and we sent mom a text, pointing her to the website where she could see pictures of the camp out. The kid never once missed his phone and had a blast. When we got back we reminded mom of the electronics rule. Told her that if they didn't like it there were local troops that allowed that sort of thing.

Is that considered a weapon or a tool?

Nothing more to add...

@@Eagledad, I am sure that's what PTC is doing. But you are going to have a hard time selling this course to the average Scouter. The cost is high, the time commitment is high and the return would likely be low. Not only are you losing $530 bucks (not including transportation) but your vacation time as well. There's no syllabus up yet which usually means the 6 days of PowerPoint are not done yet. Their audience is stated to be "Aimed at all adult leaders involved in Cub Scouting as well as commissioners." Good luck. It is hard enough to get CS leader to take the free, online training modules let alone spend their money and hard-earned vacation time to get trained. If it's anything like my district's training on how to recruit in the Asian community, it will be unproductive. The basic gist? "Recruit more Asians!" Now why didn't we think of that?

It appears BSA has come up with an answer as how to engage the Millennial Generation of parents in Scouting. However, rather than make it in to a module that you can take online, or build effective modules that can be taught locally, you'll have to pony up over $500 to get the answer at the PTC. With the issue of parent recruitment and training so key to the recruitment and retention of members in general, one would think this would be something so important that BSA would seek to make it so readily available (and swiftly implemented back at the unit) that you wouldn't have to fork over $500 bills to get the answer. Man, if I'm going to Philmont and paying THAT much money, I'm on the trail....not in a conference room. More info here: http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2016/03/21/engaging-millennials-parents-in-scouting/

Remember, we were assuming "reasonable people". You described a childish person, so there's no reasoning with him.

I get what you are saying, however, shouldn't people act civilized to each other? Shouldn't someone who holds themselves up as a former professional Scouter live up to the Oath and Law (as we all try to hold ourselves to whenever possible)? Shouldn't someone like that with that experience realize how hard it is to find, train and keep people like the person in the OP who took the time to do such a great ceremony? I get we don't know all the facts, but you really don't need them to ascertain this person did not act in a Scouting fashion toward the person doing the ceremony. There's nothing that excuses that behavior. If the person in the ceremony did a nice job, I thank them and move on. If they did something improper -- I confront them (nicely and privately) and let them know. Otherwise, I see no reason to be a coward and go behind someone's back. No excuse.

So what would you call a person who does not have the respect enough for other people to treat them with common courtesy (sorry @@Stosh, we know it is not common) and act as I suggested? Why be anonymous. Why not show gratitude? Why not discuss your concerns (privately) but in the open with those affected. Maybe "bully" is the wrong word. Maybe "coward" is a better term. But when you go behind someone's back to force change by throwing around your experience (in Scouting) that's cowardice and bullying in my book.

Owned by the CO. Parked in a garage the unit is given sole use of by the CO. Kept up and maintained by the unit. Registered and paid for by the unit.

Our council camps could use a ton of upkeep, yet our Lodge "clears brush"...and in areas that really don't matter. It is not like they are clear-cutting or removing scrub brush to reduce flash fire risks. It is busy work. We've got a ton of Oa members, yet the projects getting done are small, simple and less than most Eagle projects I've seen done. Would love to see them do more. I suspect OA is just seen as just one more thing to take up peoples' time.

Let's assume the replica sword was brought to the meeting without violating any laws. Let's assume that a replica sword is not really a weapon because it was not designed to be used like the object on which it is based. Otherwise if we go by Webster's definition of a weapon, ANY "object that is used for fighting or attacking someone or for defending yourself when someone is attacking you" can be considered a weapon (marshmallow bows and rifles are replicas too ). Let's assume the complainant is a decent person with no malice in their heart toward the person(s) performing the ceremony. Let's assume the complainant knows BSA policy and how to apply it. Assuming all of that, shouldn't such a person have the common decency to 1) Thank the person doing the ceremony for their time and efforts, 2) Diplomatically address their concerns to the CM, CC and person doing the ceremony in a private venue away from Scout's ears and other parents, and 3) Being so knowledgeable about BSA policy and being a former "professional" Scouter (or super volunteer), shouldn't they close their commentary by suggesting an alternate object to be used ((tin foil over a wooden sword) or a similar ceremony that they agree with? It's that last bit I find amazing. Without consideration of any of this (and assuming the points above are correct), the method the complainant used was not open or honest or respectful. That's why I think this smacks of bullying. Why hide? Why not respectfully confront the issue if they are really a person of "good faith" and reason?

I understand now. Makes sense. Did you discuss the difference between freeware and shareware too?

"Good people" can also show appreciation for what someone is doing -- trying to make a memorable moment for their son/grandson -- and can simply show gratitude instead of complaining. It cuts both ways. They are a bully because rather than going to the person who performed the ceremony AND the CM, they went to the CM. Second, why complain? Did they think kids will re-enact the scene with a REAL sword? If so, I'd like to see the video games and TV shows they let their kid watch. Careful, I hear that Minecraft has led to a rash of pick axe violence on playgrounds. I called them a bully because those are bully tactics. "Good people" would thank the person for what they did, ask if they could talk to the presenter and CM later in private and have a discussion (not complaint) about why they think the ceremony was improper. At the same time the CM and presenter can quote back BSA rules and regulations to show that the event was allowable. Then they can have a meaningful discussion. But this method was, well, under-handed at best.

Not sure I get this point. Are they giving away music they wrote and performed for free? If not, you cannot give ANY music you don't own the rights to for free.

I hear ya, and that's an admirable approach to take. However, let's ask one question: "If you're doing this safely and it is not prohibited, how do the BOYS feel about the ceremony?" After all, the CS mantras we hear so many times of "For the boys!" or "Do your best!" should take in to consideration how the boys feel. I'd ask them. If they say keep it, keep it. If they say trash it, trash it. Let the boys through their own desires tell this PC bully to go pound sand.

There's an extra space in the link he pasted. Open the 404 page that comes up and delete the extra space.

But if you let them bully you -- and let's be honest, that's what this is when one person does not like something a majority of the people do like and forces them to change for just them -- what's to say they will stop? What's to stay they won't like the next thing you do? If the rules don't prohibit it and you are not violating any safety issues, why NOT do it? We had parents complain about our OA tap out team. We told them if they didn't like it they could find another unit or take their son out of OA. It is not like our guys were speaking like some 50's B-movie Indian, they were merely paying tribute to the native American culture vis-a-vis their regalia and ceremony. BTW, the kid thought it was the coolest thing, go figure. When we bow to the PC bullies for no reason we continue to empower them to take more from the majority.

What if he dressed as a native american and someone asked him to stop? If it is not against the rules then if others like it but just one complains then why stop? I get the use of a proper sword might be questionable, so use a prop sword then. If it is not prohibited -- in fact many unofficial Scout sites on the net have this very ceremony listed -- why stop? In today's society you will always find someone to object about something. Unless the rules prohibit it maybe it's THAT person who needs to get thicker skin and just enjoy the moment.

In Texas our tax-exempt non-profit CO does not pay sales tax. That said, everyday purchases for the unit (food for camp outs, other supplies) we typically DO pay tax on. Bigger ticket items (tents, stoves, other gear) we tend to buy online and don't pay tax on. We COULD avoid sales tax on food, it's just hard to get the stores to review and approve the non-profit form in a timely manner.

Churches do it all the time. They raise money for youth group ski trips, missions, etc., all for Tim or Bob to go. I have seen SEVERAL churches allocate that money for the person, not just in one big kitty.

That's my point, I cannot find the "CO owns everything" stated anywhere beyond what we've already cited. If it exists it must be well hidden.