David CO

26 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

parents and children simply cannot be assured protection by the BSA.

Or by anybody else.  

It is up to the parents and children to decide what constitutes an acceptable risk and plan their activities accordingly.  

35 minutes ago, gpurlee said:

How can we do this better? 

Would it be possible to place some reasonable limit on the number of posts by an individual member?  A few people are dominating the conversation by the sheer number of their posts, most of which are just repeating what has already been said a hundred times already.  I am not suggesting that you limit the content, just the numbers.

20 minutes ago, PeterHopkins said:

They would say, "Everything we do is for the utes," as they settled down for their alcohol-fueled Saturday-night poker game. 

I hope the men didn't review and approve the adult leader applications at these alcohol-fueled Saturday-night poker games.  

I fear that some scout leaders may have been chosen for their ability to socialize with the adults rather than their skill at leading boys.

9 minutes ago, PeterHopkins said:

yout participants

I watched My Cousin Vinny, so I knew that's how you New Yorkers pronounce it.  I just didn't know you spelled it that way, too.  

53 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

30, 40, 50 plus years ago they weren't just allowed to slip in because the door was open wide for the abusers.  

That really isn't true.  The committee chairman was expected to thoroughly review all applications for unit leadership.  If the committee members weren't personally aquatinted with the applicant, they expected references from people who were well-known in the Chartered Organization.

At one time, the local Superintendent of Schools was expected to review the charter renewal and unit roster.  They were pretty well aware of most of the disreputable persons in their school district, and were in a good position to point them out to the unit committee and chartered organization.  

This was a lot easier when scouting was more local, school districts were smaller and less bureaucratic, and each unit had only a handful of leaders.  

8 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Scouting was my safe place

I think some people came into scouting with an unfair expectation of us.  Yes, we always strove to be safe.  Teaching about health and safety is an important part of scouting.  My unit never promised to be their safe place, as you put it.

I am not Fred MacMurray.  I never adopted Kurt Russell.  I had a few foster kids in my program, but I never adopted them.  My troop was not an adoption program.  

We were also not a big brother program.  I did use adult association as a method of scouting, but that is different from being a big brother program.  

I did have some scouts who had terrible relationships with their fathers, but I was not their surrogate father.  Being a surrogate father was not my role in my unit or my Chartered Organization.

Like everyone, I am shocked and appalled by the revelations of child sexual abuse in scouting.  That is not scouting.  Parents and scouts had a reasonable expectation that this would not take place in scouting.

I also think that some people came into scouting with an unreasonable expectation of what we would be able to do for them, and what we would be able to be for them.  Scouting is not a panacea for all of the world's problems.  That is too high an expectation of us. 

My CO only asked me to run a nice scouting program.  I think I did that.  But I apparently failed to meet many people's expectations.  Sorry.

5 hours ago, IWasAbusedinScouting said:

who are still trying to defend the organization as being still worth-while

I still believe, whole heartedly, that scouting is still a worth-while activity for boys.  I haven't wavered in that.  I wouldn't hesitate to recommend scouting to any boy.

My family has been very fortunate in that dual citizenship has given us a choice of scouting programs.  I wish it were within my power to make a similar choice available to all boys in the United States, but that is sadly not possible.

I do question the value of scouting to the Chartered Organization.  BSA has made its scouting program increasingly inconsistent with the goals and aims of our youth outreach.  Even as the program's value has decreased, the cost and liabilities have dramatically risen.  

When Lone Scouts of America was bought out, alumni organizations were formed for us to continue our fellowship outside of LSA.  I hope something similar will happen for the many former members of BSA. 

44 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Moreover, for all you know the Local Council(s) are on the side of the COs vs. BSA National.

I assume this is a joke.  Good one.  

1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

To only exclude COs and tell them “good luck” is not appropriate. 

It would be very unusual for the CO's to all show up at a council meeting to vote out the council leadership.  This might do it.

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

 

I wonder who he doesn't like?

(Raising my hand and waving it wildly in the air)

Ooh!  Me, me, pick me!!!

1 hour ago, qwazse said:

Well, I guess if there were racial disparities in access to firearms, ammunition, and shooting ranges, that would be a good start.

Just move to Chicago.  The whole city is a shooting range.  

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

If those “invalid” claims are wholesale set aside, this will have been a farce, wrapped in a disaster, shrouded in a catastrophe, encased in a moral outrage.

I guess it depends on where you think the crime occurred.  Did it happen exclusively in a remote location in a campground of a time-barred state, or did it also happen in a hidden away corner of a secret file room at BSA headquarters?  I think both.  It shouldn't be treated like a local issue.

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

I am also OK with time barred claims getting full shares from the settlement fund.  

I not only think that this is the compassionate thing to do, I think it is also the smart thing to do.  If claimants start turning on each other, they will lose much of their public support.  They will convince the general public that it really is all about the money.

24 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

I know the BSA professional management, the NEC, and most of the NEB and they are honorable men and women who try to follow the law and listen to their legal counsel. 

Is there a gagging emoji available?

24 minutes ago, MikeS72 said:

The adult application currently has a box asking for "signature of chartered organization head or representative".

Yes.  Obviously, the COR cannot sign off on his own application.  In that case, the IH signature is required.  

In my unit, the COR signed off on all applications other than his own.  He brought them to me for review.  I initialed them to indicate my approval.  

Just now, SiouxRanger said:

Both IH and COR, or just only one?

I seem to recall obtaining the IH signature years ago, but not sure if the IH signature is still required.

The COR signs the applications.  The IH signs the charter renewal, which lists all of the youth and adult members of the unit.  So all members of a unit get signed off by both the IH and COR, but not on the same document.

15 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

When did BSA Adult applications start requiring COR or IH sign off? 

2 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

My adult involvement goes back to 1996± and I believe COR or IH signatures were required then and ever since-and were pro forma at that.

I was an IH in the early 80's.  Yes.  IH and COR signatures were required.

31 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

 

In other words, this gets back at the bigger/broader point. So many COs simply looked at charters as "we signed the document once a year, that was all" and utterly, completely and utterly failed to realize that as COs they were responsible for selection (and oversight) of leaders.

 

Many CO's looked at it that way because it is what their councils were telling them.  Councils constantly lie to the CO's.   

58 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

I am a current leader at my troop, a council chair, and I am a state rep for my national-level CO to be a liaison for all scouting units within my state.

That surprises me.  Most people at that level have little to no concern for the lower-income families.

42 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

at what point does scouting become too expensive for the kids that really need it, but can't afford it?

I agree with you 100% on this point.  Scouting should be an affordable activity.  Unfortunately, its not.  BSA is more interested in providing expensive destination activities for well-heeled families.  That's where the $$$ is.

29 minutes ago, Tatung42 said:

Council decided to intervene and tell Packs that they were only supposed to recruit from specific schools.  

Do you really believe your council has the authority to do that?

27 minutes ago, Tatung42 said:

Council says that they need to boost the number of scouts in the struggling Packs, so they decided to redraw the recruitment boundaries. 

Is this a joke?  Recruitment boundaries?

2 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

 

@David CO  The reason that the committee membership lists are not readily available is to limit abuse from volunteers in a youth program 

I very much doubt that.  I think it is much more likely that members maintain their anonymity in order to hang on to their positions.  You can't be held accountable if nobody knows who you are.  

Anyhow, I think the risk of abuse is far greater for the children than it is for the national committee membership. 

When you can honestly say that 80,000 committee members have been abused in scouting, I will have greater sympathy for BSA's viewpoint. 

30 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

In short reply: a) Agree - it is because the members and professionals who are associated with committees receive foul language and threats - occasionally death threats.

This is not unique to national scouters.  Over a hundred thousand of our good citizens serve on city councils, school boards, park boards, library boards, etc..  It can be a thankless task.  It can draw criticism, both deserved and undeserved.  These local bodies conduct open meetings, and the names of their members are made public.  BSA could do the same.

I don't buy the argument that BSA needs to operate in such secrecy.  

41 minutes ago, MattR said:

Maybe we can get a page out of it.

Feel free to start a separate thread.