National alcohol policy

[Adrianvs 10]

"You should also tell the scouts not to get in his car and explain the danger to them, explain to them that if he leaves you are required by law to report him to the police and to the Scouing office."

 

This goes beyond the "Recognize and report. Period." sutra that you have been repeating, however. Since we have established that the proper recourse in the case of a tired driver is to call the local law enforcement agencies and Scout Executive, what about the cell phone driver? Statistically speaking, the case still holds. MORALLY speaking, do we have an obligation to act as well? Some people have a difficulty distinguishing between legal and moral obligations, but I submit that they exist.

 

Should I call the police when a scout reports to me that assistant scoutmaster Jim talks on his cell phone while driving? Statisticians and cognitive psychologists alike tell me that it is more dangerous than driving above the average BAC allowed in most states.

[cjmiam 10]

Actually I believe the highest cause of crashes was found to be rubbernecking. Eyes wandering off on something more interesting than the road. But thats beside the point. Dave originally was asking how the camp director should respond. And I believe that the camp director has a legal duty to respond with more than just reporting. Again, it probably depends on how it is worded in their guidelines. But the camp director may have no clue who the guy is in the car. It might be the Scouts dad or anyone for that matter. But that too is beside the point.

 

I believe that if laws are being broke on BSA property the camp director has a legal obligation to remove the child from that situation. I dont think things are as clear cut for volunteers at camp. The most significant difference comes down to whos liable. Right after the corporate entity, comes the administration which includes the camp director.

 

Also, its much easier to prove the four elements of negligence against the camp director than it is the volunteer or another bystander.

1. The camp director has a duty to provide a safe environment. In a camp setting the camp director has a legal duty to act versus the moral duty.

2. The duty owed must be breeched by not performing the standard of care required for that environment and activity.

3. Proximate cause- the injury must be the result of the act or failure to act.

4. There must be actual damage sustained.

 

So if a camp director does allow a law to be broken in such a way as some of you have described, he needs to hope and pray that nothing bad happens. Cause if there no number 4 they cant be sued for negligence. He could be fired, but thats probably about it.

 

If you were the Scoutmaster on an outing and something like this occurred, you would probably be second on the list of liable right after the corporate entity. Something to think about I guess