walk in the woods

I'm not going to copy the entire other thread of my examples, but, for the record I work in IT Ops so weekends, nights and holidays are required because that's when we get systems. I argue for my guys raises because in my organization the raise pool is fixed so it's a zero-sum game. I asked the questions I did because I don't think you can split leadership from management. Good leaders sometimes have to manage, good managers sometimes have to lead. I worked for a small IT contracting house early in my career. The man who started the company was fond of saying managers are the guys directing the troops who are cutting their way through the jungle; leaders are the guys above the treeline deciding where to go. The point he was trying to get at, and one that I tend to agree with, is leaders should generally be strategic thinkers while managers are generally tactical thinkers. This generally fits Stosh's model but it's broader and allows for different leadership styles (servant, autocrat, salesman) and flexibility for situational awareness.

I think leadership is like pornography, hard to define but easy to identify when you see it! Stosh, help me understand how it works in your definition. I'm a manager, says so on my business card, and I'm regularly given tasks that need to be accomplished and expected to see them through. Seems like it fits your definition of management. So, if I have to call my team in on a Saturday to complete a task I'm managing, but, if I take care of them by buying them lunch or making sure they get and take some comp time, am I also a leader? I have to evaluate their performance every year against some set of standards, a management task, but, then I have take care of them by defending my evals and arguing for their raises, bonuses and personal development. Leadership, right? If I have to fire an underperforming employee I'm certainly not "taking care" of that employee but I may be taking care of my overall team both from a performance and morale perspective. Leadership or management?

Definitely wait. the youngest scouts in our contingent troop last time were definitely in over their heads.

We shared the same mud.

The 2013 Jambo cost was around $900 IIRC, my council in Illinois charged $1500. That included the Jambo fee, bus transport out and back, a few camp outs and outings along the way, t-shirts, hats, backpacks, bolos, patches, trading coins, something simulating per diem for the road meals, etc. The fee was the same for leaders and scouts. I think they're asking $1650 or something this time. The 2010 Jamboree from our council included a few days in DC but the cost was significantly higher around $2500 I think.

My council used to require both. Blue cards attached to the advancement report in order to purchase the patches. Blue cards ultimately made their way back to the unit. What happened to them while they were in the council ether is a mystery.

This is part of it, Boy Scout popcorn had it's genesis somewhere in what the 80's or 90's? This! On our streets the first customer question when asked to buy popcorn is "How much?" often followed by "No way!" Sell the camp angle all you want, few people are interested in plopping down $10 for 4 ounces of bad caramel corn. I'd have been ostricized in my office if I brought in a popcorn order form. At the risk of getting this thrown into I&P, Girl Scouts are more socially acceptable (PC) still than Boy Scouts.

And that is the beauty of liberty. Stosh can weigh the risks/rewards and make his decision, Sentinel gets to do the same thing, and they both get to enjoy the trail. If they come to different conclusions they take the personal responsibility for those decisions! Ain't it beautiful!

That's the stuff. There was a time it was being stolen to use in method production

Did he have anhydrous on the property or near by?

Used to be rumors about this in Shawnee NF in southern Illinois as well.

The behavior and/or fears of others do not create a claim to restrict my freedom. That's true whether we're talking guns or gay marriage or religious freedom or pot or the right to association. As long as my behavior doesn't prevent somebody else from exercising their freedoms, it's all good.

It's bigger than just gun rights though isn't it. The part of our constitution that guarantees gun rights also guarantees freedom of speech, press, assembly, protection from self-incrimination, protection from unreasonable and warrentless search and seizure, due process, speedy trials, protection from cruel and unusual punishment, et. al. granting those rights to the people in order to limit a federal government and preventing it from becoming oppressive. In the past two decades the US government, run by both major political parties, have given us bipartisan freedom crushing regulation and legislation in the name of keeping us safe, while we've witnessed the power of government to spy on journalists, intimidate out of favor political groups, and gather mass surveillance on the populace, instead of toeing the line of constitutional liberty. The reality is it's been going on for generations but it seems to be hitting more of a critical mass these days. The debate of gun-rights is a battle in the on-going war of individual liberty against a centralized government power monopoly.

An article discussion some parents opting for indoor play rooms over large back yards when house shopping. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/for-family-home-buyers-this-room-trumps-a-big-backyard-2016-01-19?siteid=rss&rss=1

The short and obvious answer is the one that I'm trained and qualified to carry. As for the specific firearm, I suppose like everything in the outdoors it depends on where you are going, what you are doing, and the risks you expect to encounter. You know, be prepared and all. But at a higher level, if the parents and CO of a unit are comfortable with their leader(s) carrying a firearm (concealed or open), what business is it of yours or any other control-freak? Your irrational gun fears do not create a claim on my freedoms. Now, can we be done with the name calling?

Background checks only catch those that have already been caught.

From my perspective the problem with the knife law is it starts from the assumption that the government grants your freedom to own and carry a knife rather than acknowledging that ones freedom is unalienable. Unless my behavior causes another to be unable to exercise their own freedom, that behavior is not subject to government intervention or regulation. Freedom it is not granted by the government, it can only be stolen by the government with the consent of a willing populace. That is complete madness.

Ain't freedom beautiful and self-organizing to boot!

Because FREEDOM happens in odd places.

Depends. If being an Eagle puts a fire in his belly for the job then yes, it could be an advantage for him to survive the job. The gentleman who was my DE when I first got back into scouting is an Eagle and did a great job. Since then I've been through two young ladies that lasted less than a year each because they were unwilling to give up their time after they learned what the job really entailed, one woman who came from the non-profit sector that was really good and one woman that was straight out of college and ok, but absolutely no outdoor experience. It's like a box of chocolates........

Here's part of what National thinks a UC does, http://www.scouting.org/Home/Commissioners/orientation.aspx. I've recently signed on as a UC. My understanding is the expectation of at least 6 unit contacts a year plus a detailed assessment and help with JTE and recharter as required. Plus any ad hoc requests that come up. Multiplied by 2 or 3 units.

Bullet 14 in the Unauthorized Activities section of the G2SS: Except for law enforcement officers required to carry firearms within their jurisdiction, firearms shall not be brought on camping, hiking, backpacking, or other Scouting activities except those specifically planned for target shooting under the supervision of a currently certified BSA national shooting sports director or National Rifle Association firearms instructor.

Hmmm. I don't recall seeing that banned in the G2SS.....

Technically, he doesn't need any training or to even register to help out on campouts assuming your are over 21. From the G2SS: Two-deep leadership on all outings required. A minimum of two registered adult leaders, or one registered leader and a participating Scout’s parent, or another adult is required for all trips and outings. One of these adults must be 21 years of age or older.

I get that but it's a blanket policy designed to protect the corporation instead of serve the scouts. If my unit is chartered by the local volunteer fireman's association, and I'm willing to be present to be the YPT monitor, why would the officers need to be registered scouters to hold a Fire Safety MB event or for the EMTs/Paramedics to hold a First Aid event? If two sets of parents are comfortable with their sons working on Family Life MB with their local pastor why does the pastor need to be registered? Local Legion Commander working on citizenship? Local high school biology teacher working on environmental science? Any number of examples. Ultimately I suppose I'm arguing for the corporation to trust local leadership and parents to work together to protect the kids in their charge.