clemlaw

As others have pointed out, the McDonald's coffee case is a poor example if you want to show how the tort system has run amok. I don't recall the exact facts of the case, but the coffee that was served was too hot to drink, and it caused severe injury to the woman. I once had coffee spilled on my lap due to the gross negligence and reckless conduct of Northwest Airlines. (And the little brat in the seat in front of me who kept rocking his seat back and forth which caused it to spill.) But I didn't sue Northwest Airlines, and I didn't sue the little monster in the seat in fron

>>>>>>>BP, along with what you said, I would give a written statement outlining a non-all inclusive list of risks associated with any event or outing that the scouts may participate in and have a waiver of liability signed by the parents and notarized

>>>>I would not see a big problem with someone earning Eagle without Swimming MB -- they still have to pass the Second and First Class swimming requirements.

Why? Because occasionally, someone will tell you that you're doing a pretty good job. Oh, and some of the kids will probably turn out a little bit better due to your efforts. A while back, someone posted an oft-reprinted essay. It wasn't talking about a Scouter who had turned out the next Einstein. It was wondering what would have happened if Hitler had been in Scouting. Maybe he would have learned how to get along with people who were different from him, and inspired by his Painting MB counselor, gone on to earn a modest living selling his paintings. Nobody would have ever heard of

>>>>>Dying while on a hike (to use a recent event) is a life-altering (albeit ending) event. ... Personally, the only difference I see between Patrol Led and Adult Led is safety.

You should never utter the two words "no comment", especially if a camera is rolling in the general vicinity. Even if a camera is not rolling, it gets rendered by the reporter as "____ refused to comment on the air." But if you are seen uttering those two words on the air, the public generally interprets this as "I am guilty". If you really must, the words to politely utter are something like, "I really want to talk to you, but our lawyers said that any requests should go through them." Then, give them the lawyer's phone number. When asked follow up questions, politely repeat the

I don't know for sure, but to be on the safe side, I'd probably set it _near_ the fire for a few minutes before burying it in a bunch of hot coals or putting a bunch of hot charcoal on top of it. But it will probably be OK. Even in hot weather, you're probably changing the outside temperature by several hundred degrees, so an extra 50 degrees or whatever probably won't hurt. But still, right from the ice to the fire is probably a bad idea!

>>>>>So to say that people who were Scouts in the 70's "have little to no expereince on how the program was meant to be", I think is really not correct.

I was assuming that the trail head was within the fee area of a Park, where they would have interacted with a ranger at least to pay the fee. But even if the trailhead is unattended, I think that photo would be the most powerful thing to show the jury, since it probably looks like a rest area on the side of a public highway, with parking lot and signs, and probably trash cans and outhouse. (And the trailhead 20 miles away, where they must have had a car parked, probably looked the same.) Chances are, they met other people on the trail that day, and they were probably all just indivi

>>>>the scout law is developing character and every right decision a person makes requires some combination of those traits

>>>>>>They don't believe that advancement, skill, and character can develop when adults aren't teaching it.

Just out of curiousity, because I'm not able to view the video right now. Did this take place on an established trail that was marked and/or maintained by some agency such as the National Park Service or National Forest Service? That certainly wouldn't be the only factor, but it is something that I would consider as a juror, especially if they had checked in with a ranger or someone in charge before setting off. (Of course, if the ranger had said that it was too hot a day to be hiking on that trail, then that would be an even more relevant factor, IMHO.) Clearly, that's not the onl

The online training is actually pretty good for TDL. Interestingly, through a mixup on my part, I accidentally took the same course twice--once in person, and then again online. For me, with some experience in Scouting, I got more out of the in-person course, because the course didn't follow an outline too closely, and it mostly consisted of other leaders bouncing ideas off each other. But still, the online training was pretty good, and an absolute newbie probably would have learned a lot more from that format than from the live course I attended. I don't know if it's available on

>>>>I understand where you are coming from but my point is simply that the facts of the allegations don't matter to answer the question asked.

He probably expected an answer like, "fill out form 12333-Z in triplicate and mail it to Irving." Instead, he got a philosophical discussion of which levels of murder would be appropriate for filling out that form. I suspect no murder was involved in this particular case.

Oh, it sounds like he's doing a great job, and there are many ways to recruit. But I'm just suggesting that if you sent out a mailing to every Eagle Scout age 22-40 in a particular set of Zip codes, I bet a pretty high percentage of them would call back and say that they would be happy to do it. If I had gotten such a letter, there were a few occasions when I would have said that I was just too busy. But most of the time, I would have jumped at the chance to help out. Should I have done this myself without being asked? Yes. But I didn't, and I bet there are a lot of people in

>>>>It's the District Advancement Chairman's job!!!

>>>>>That is what your District Advancement should do for you in organizing the MBC's.

>>>>>I am not a practicioner of "in-troop only" counseling; the kids learn our buttons. It's a better Adult Association process for them to meet a stranger, it will equip them for the job interview when they are 16.) So to me, it's COUNSEL what you enjoy, ENJOY what you counsel.

Honestly, the chances of a Scout leader's being called as a witness to testify as to a confession, while theoretically possible, are pretty close to zero. Realistically, the only way that it's going to happen is if the person hearing the confession approached the police or prosectutor. Again, it's a theoretical possibility, but as a practical matter, it ain't gonna happen. And even if it does happen, IMHO, it's just a natural consequence of the youth's behavior. If the scout takes responsibility for his actions and confesses, then it seems to me that he really ought to face the crimina

>>>>If the merit badge counselor list is not published how are Scoutmasters going to find you anyway? >No, he wasn't undercover.

I noticed on scouting.org that the MB counselor training I took a few months ago showed up on my record, so I ought to send in a MB counselor application to the council. I don't want to spread myself too thin, so I'm wondering what MB's I should make myself available for. I looked through the requirements, and I'm competent to counsel a number of them. The actual list of counselors is not published, so I can't just browse through and see where they're lacking. For the next five years or so, my main involvement with Scouting will be as a Cub Scout leader, so I'm not connected with

Well, there are two things going on. First of all, he presumably engaged in a certain behavior, namely, drinking when he was under-aged, and then driving. Hypothetically, let's say that he showed up at his EBOR and announced, "I got drunk last night, drove home, and didn't get caught!" I think most of us agree that's something that should be taken into consideration (although you would have to give him extra credit for being trustworthy). The fact that he got caught and that there were criminal consequences is a separate issue. And I agree that the mere fact that he got caught

I generally agree with the posts here saying that this should have an effect on whether or not the scout becomes Eagle. I really can't say exactly what that effect should be, because that is extremely fact-intensive, and I doubt if we can get enough facts to hash it out on the internet. But I did have one comment: >>>>One problem we have is they way people see DUI. People don't see DUI as a serious crime.

Well, the case of "I did it so I wouldn't get sued" was decided by a judge, but if there had been a jury, I bet they would have ruled the same way. Yes, there are many cases that could go either way, so perhaps drama is the deciding factor in some cases. But some cases are dramatic for a reason. If the defendant's negligence is of dramatic proportions, then you really can't blame the jury for being swayed by drama. And if the defendant is busy taking down tents when he should be heading for the hospital, you really can't blame the plaintiff's lawyer for making the jury aware of the