Broken Rules and

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Gee Dad, I am honored you expected more from me, but I find it odd you hold other people to a much higher standard of decorum when debating than you hold yourself.

 

Now, Bob said "So let me get this straight, you feel a scout with an extra hole in his ear lobe has severe character flaws, but an adult who wanders off into the woods with someone elses child is "to be given permission to make mistakes"."

 

What is/was your answer to this?

 

And lets not add the heart attack, cholera outbreak or any other catastrophic event, answer the question as posed.

 

Oh, and BTW, I have come to understand your abusive style and use of hyperbole are just your natural style and I wouldnt want to inhibit your First Amendment rights else you may have to call on the ACLU to defend you (LIKE THAT WOULD HAPPEN!!!)

 

PS. boy wearing bra and panties and purple hair and fingernails (just wanted to say it first THIS time)

[bigbeard 10]

Bob,

 

You have probably forgotten more about the Rules and Regs than I will ever know. I stand in awe.

 

If we had a dollar for every BSA rule I've bent or broken, the Troop would be on the NYSE. Ignorance is not an excuse, they say, but it happens. I wear the Trained badge, took SALT, and am taking the new training course with adults in the Troop (lead from the front, right?). I learn more each week, but I still lack your range of knowledge. To be honest, if I gotta learn it all A to Z, then we're doomed.

 

In our small Troop, we've done our best to follow at least the Big Ticket Items in BSA's version of Rocks and Shoals. We've had to cancel outings for lack of 2-deep leadership, stayed out of the water on a hike along a waterway, etc. Not popular decisions with the boys, but rules are rules. Ignoring them sends the wrong message to the boys. I signed on with them in place, and the requirement to follow them is a matter of duty. They are there to help produce The Program safely. Follow 'em.

 

That being said, in the hypotheticals proposed by Eisley, et.al., (or in their perfect versions) the rules would be a secondary concern. A no-brainer. If there is a price to be paid for one of my decisions, so be it. That price will not be the life/health of a child entrusted to my care.

 

"Train us, trust us, let us lead!"

 

[Bob White 20]

bigbeard,

 

Don't think I have every rule and reg memorized I don't. Or that I'm perfect I'm not and I never claimed to be. that distinction was glued to me by other posters. Don't fall for the hypothetical smoke screens others have laid down. Real life isn't as complicated as their fairy tales, and there aren't that many Policies in the Program to keep track of.

 

Every Leader who has the slightest bit of training knows the basic Youth Protection Policies. When they learned them, it was not presented as "try not to do this" it was told to them "don't do this". Could it have been any clearer.

 

I never said if a scout is severely injured don't get help, or make sure your your scouts are sheltered. But lets look at this again.

 

It was poor planning on the leaders part and poor actions at camp that lead to a non-relative adult sleeping alone with a child. That could esily have been avoided.

 

In the fairy tale of the boy in the car, let's set Youth Protection aside and look at good emergency first-aid practices. You never transport someone alone as the driver. You have to choose between concentrating on driving or concentrating on the victim. Speeding while treating a severly injured person would only create 2 casulties.

 

A good leader would have treated the child on site and would have had an emergency plan on obtaining professional medical help. Or a good leader would have had someone stay and treat the injured person and sent someone for help.

 

Even if you bought into the situations they fabricated, a string of bad leadership lead up to them. The theme that started this string was Broken rules or Bad leadership. Have you ever seen one without the other?

 

Neither have I.

 

Bob

 

PS

Can we please all get off this kick that understanding the program is a bad thing. I know and scout with a lot of leaders who know and follow the rules, and have no trouble seeing that the scouts have a fun and adventurous scouting experience. Knowing the program and delivering a scouting program are by no means mutually exclusive. In fact it is quite the opposite. The assumption a few of you have made is that I only know the books and not the field work. I'm sure none of us want to get into a debate over who has more experience, but I assure you I have spent and continue to spend as much time as a front line unit volunteer as anyone in this forum and possibly more than some.

 

 

 

[Bob White 20]

TYPO

that should have read "or don't make sure your scouts are sheltered

[evmori 11]

IMHO,

Common sense should prevail. If a Scout is seriously hurt & bleeding and he is not my son I would rush him as fast as I could to the hospital. I really don't think the parents of this Scout are going to worry about how I got their son to the hospital. And if they do decide to take some action against me, let 'em. IN my heart, I did my best for my Scout.

 

All the training in the world will not prepare you for the things that come up in this organization. Reading all the rules & regs won't do it either. There are things that are going to happen that will require an adult BSA leader to make a split second decision. He/she won't have time to dig out the "book" & he/she know this was never covered in training.

 

If we went "strictly by the book" our Scouts would have little fun because we would be too worried about breaking the rules!

 

Gents & Ladies, lets remember, the 1st word in BSA is Boy.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

[Rooster7 11]

It's not the program. BSA has a great program and I agree with its tenants. It's not your knowledge of the program, which for most the part seems to far exceed others on this board. It's not your experience, which to my knowledge, no one has disputed. It's the pharisaical judgment that you cast upon others whenever a perceived transgression of the rules may occur that gets my shorts in a bunch. I think there is room in the program for error, misjudgment, and special circumstances. You quote BSA regs like their bible verses.

 

You'd probably make an excellent legislator, but I wouldn't want you as a juror.

 

[Bob White 20]

evmori,

 

When did I ever say that the boy didn't come first? Don't let that ficticious bleeeding boy in the car snowball you. There is no reason that this program cannot be carried out using the methods, the procedures and the rules of the BSA. That's like saying you can't drive a car without breaking a law. After all look how many laws there are. But millions of drivers go all day long without breaking the law. Some do break it, some in little ways some in big ways. When they get caught they get punished. Some in big ways some in little, others even get off with just a warning.

 

Scouting is no differnt. What concerns me, in my role in scouting, is that some leaders look at youth protection as a minor violation and it's not. Violating Youth protection is the Queen Mother of all violations and carries the greatest penalty. Why? You said it yourself "The first word in BSA is BOY."

 

To say that you can't provide a quality scouting program without breaking any rules is simply not true. It's a matter of the choices you make. Our society is far more complicated and has far more laws than scouting. Does that mean you teach your scouts that they can't function successfully in the world without breaking laws? I would hope not.

 

Bob

[eagle90 125]

I have always wondered about this scenario - returning from a campout with 4 scouts in my car. We normally drop off the scouts at home since we do not normally know the exact time of our arrival due to weather, traffic, late sleepers, etc. After I drop off three scouts, I am going to be alone in the car with the last scout to be dropped off. A violation of Youth Protection?

According to some this is sacreligious. What do I do?

[Bob White 20]

eagle90,

 

First of all let me thank you for your approach. It's one thing to say "here is a situation where it's OK to violate Youth Protection" and a far differnet thing to say "what can I do in this situation so I don't violate youth protection."

 

Now to your dilema which I think alot of leaders have.

1. (this is probably the best method)

I know of many units who say to the parents, "No registered leader is allowed to be alone with a scout, it is a national rule for everyone's protection. It will be necessary for you to have someone pick them up, whether it is you or another parent. We expect to here between these hours. We will call you as we get near town. you will need to have someone here or at home when we call"

2. Have 2 cars, one follows the other.

3. Have the parents of the last house meet you at the home of the next to last scout.

4. Last resort, The rule is stay in view of another adult, if you feel that travel on a public road is staying in view, then you can try to protect your family that way.

 

I say protect your family because that is the other edge of the sword in Youth Protection.

 

Let's say that scout who spend a night in a tent with a well meaning leader, decides to claim years done the road, that he was molested that night (and I'm am in no way saying he was). As soon as the BSA finds out you violated the Youth Protection Policies and stayed alone in the tent with a child you will be left to fend for yourself. Lawyer fees, court fees, financial settlements, will all come from your pocket. Even if you choose to protect yourself with your own liability umbrella in addition to scouting's, you may likely be abandoned by your Insurance company for violating this standard that you were trained to follow. Think of the harm you expose your family to, just to do what you thought at the time, to be a small violation.

 

As long as you stay within the bold print in the Guide to Safe Scouting and Youth Protection, not only will the boys be safer but you and your family will recieve legal defense and have all fees and fines paid for through the BSA.

 

That coverage and protection comes with a small price tag. We need to stay in the rules.

 

Bob

 

 

 

[Dedicated Dad 10]

Gee Dad, I am honored to a much higher standard of decorum when debating than you hold yourselfI have come to understand your abusive style Now now OGE, you know very well my decorum for those promoting perversion is considerably different than on other topics. I did my best to be civil to Bob at all times and I apologize if I havent lived up to your standards. I equally understand if you hold no particular use for me because of my decorum on the sodomy threads, however I will remain civil to such end. Now, Bob said "So let me get this straight, you feel a scout with an extra hole in his ear lobe has severe character flaws, but an adult who wanders off into the woods with someone elses child is "to be given permission to make mistakes. What is/was your answer to this? My answer is I only presented a scenario with the SM lost and alone with the Scout. I did not, as Bob embellished, say the SM wandered off into the woods with someone elses child, clearly that would be a violation, and surely you can give me more credit than that, at least I hope you can. And truth be known I hadnt given any thought to the scenario leading up to that point much less the situation was a result of some dubious abuse means. And I did ask Bob if there could ever exist any situation of any kind where the SM could find him self in that situation and not being a bad leader. Since he wont answer Ill ask you, do you think there exists any scenario where this could happen in good faith? As far as the SM is allowed to make mistakes thing I thought it had merit in the discussion since we were talking about mistakes. Why would they put that clause in the SM handbook if it has no application, and on the same page no less? It doesnt say SM is given permission to make mistakes except. What do you think its application is OGE, less of course Bobs little embellishment of the SM purposely wondering off someone elses child? Further, since you and Bob dont have any contingencies for the heart attack, et al scenarios, do you think this has never or will never happen, just wondering? PS. boy wearing bra and panties and purple hair and fingernails (just wanted to say it first THIS time) ??? RespectfullyThe Corkscrew Debate Team

 

 

 

[NJCubScouter 1389]

the sodomy threads

 

DedicatedDad, you are one funny guy. "Sodomy threads," really. Is that what you really think of the issue of whether otherwise qualified leaders are disqualified because they are honest about their orientation? It's all about what part goes where?

 

Those were rhetorical questions. I'm pretty sure the answers are "yes" even if you don't like the way I asked the questions.

 

By the way, do you realize that in some states, "sodomy" is still illegal even between married persons of opposite genders? Better be careful, someone might be looking in your window to check.

 

Sorry for the topical diversion, but I didn't start it.

 

[Bob White 20]

Nice try DD but I doubt that anyone bought that little tap dance you tried to give us.

 

My answer is I only presented a scenario with the SM lost and alone with the Scout. I did not, as Bob embellished, say the SM wandered off into the woods with someone elses child, clearly that would be a violation, and surely you can give me more credit than that, at least I hope you can.

 

You didnt say a Scoutmaster and his son, and we were talking of potential Youth Protection violations, and you knew that an adult with their son was not a violation. You were insinuating a scout not a son, and everyone who read that post knows it.

 

You put yourself in a corner that you cant get out of.

 

At least Ive stayed consistent in my concern to stay on the course the BSA has set for all of us. You on the other hand send some very mixed messages, the last of which OGE and I called you on, and your attempt to slide out was weak at best.

 

I have no problems with scouters who say you know, I made a mistake or I need to find a way to do this better But, as just another scouter, one of tens of thousands who care about the program and the scouts, it does rankle me to read your comments where, its OK to violate scoutings rules, but not DD's rules.

 

[Dedicated Dad 10]

Is that what you really think of the issue of whether otherwise qualified leaders are disqualified because they are honest about their orientation? It's all about what part goes where? Is there a coherent question there somewhere, Im not sure if Im suppose to answer whether I think about the practice of perversion as being filth and degradation or the choice of denying the one and only orientation we are all born with in order to choose a life of baseness and repugnance. Those were rhetorical questions. I'm pretty sure the answers are "yes" even if you don't like the way I asked the questions. Glad youre not my lawyer because the answers are no and no, but youre welcome to make your best case councilor. Knock yourself out. By the way, do you realize that in some states, "sodomy" is still illegal even between married persons of opposite genders? Hehehe Like many of the other pro perversion cheerleaders you too like to compare to practice to man/woman relationships, please enlighten us how they are the same? Better be careful, someone might be looking in your window to check. OK by me, its societies first defense against legitimizing the obscenity of same-sex marriage, abuse of gay adoption and the corruption of insuring the AIDS culture. Sorry for the topical diversion, but I didn't start it. Yep, maybe if we looked through the kaleidoscope of your world I did, but then again was I making a point to OGE? Hmm? If you want something constructive to do, why dont you bother to follow up your values question to me question on the piercing thread or maybe take this to any number of sodomy threads, regardless, dont be a distracter on Roosters thread, its not scoutlike. (Sound of OGE in background saying: Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight! ) Just kidding OGE

[Dedicated Dad 10]

You didnt say a Scoutmaster and his son( I agree. ) You were insinuating a scout not a son, and everyone who read that post knows it. Me included! Bob, are you sure you want to insist this is my position?

 

 

the last of which OGE and I called you on, and your attempt to slide out was weak at best. Please call me again on it, Im trying my best to follow. What exactly have I not responded too, I certainly dont want to slide out. Should you want me to restate my questions you havent answered Ill be happy to abridge. I have no problems with scouters who say you know, I made a mistake or I need to find a way to do this better Thats not true, youve told countless people and most recently eisely that he was a danger to the program. But, as just another scouter, one of tens of thousands who care about the program and the scouts, it does rankle me to read your comments where, its OK to violate scoutings rules, but not DD's rules. No I did not, dont put words in my mouth! I asked about the SM is given permission to make mistakes clause on the same page as the regulation we were talking about, what gives? Why are you like this?

 

 

 

 

 

[Bob White 20]

But DD, you haven't been talking about mistakes. You've been talking about knowingly breaking the rules because you felt your excuse was more important than the rule, or the rule didn't matter.

 

I have never taken anyone to task for breaking a rule they didn't know about. Only the rules they knew about and ignored. Every disagreement we've had you claimed you either knew and disagreed with, or once you were told where the rule was, you created skewed arguments in order to avoid responsibility.

 

You're not asking to be forgiven mistakes you seem to want approval to continue doing whatever you want without reprisal.