Guide to Safe Scouting Question

[Fat Old Guy 11]

What is the difference between squirt gun battles and laser tag? In both games, you lie in wait for you opponent or stalk him and then attempt to shoot him. The only difference is that in laser tag, once shot, you are out of the game. In that regard, it is like "release" or even dodge ball (which is no prohibited in my local system).

 

 

[packsaddle 753]

dsteele, don't forget, I'm on your side for this one.

[Adrianvs 10]

With all this about stalking in paintball and leaving such skills to the military, I am reminded of Baden Powell's writing in Scouting for Boys. Just the other day, I was browsing the requirements for Stalking Merit Badge in a 50's issue handbook of mine. I remember one of the requirements was to track or stalk (don't remember wording) a human being and determine if it's a man or woman, young or old, etc. Baden Powell wrote quite a bit about stalking and tracking skills. Not being seen or heard, etc. I'm not drawing any implications about the relevance to this issue or whether the current policy is good or bad. I am just wondering what Baden Powell would have thought about this thread. I wonder if he would have embraced something like paintball if he had the choice. Again, I'm not concerned with whether his opinion would have been right or wrong. I just find it suddenly very interesting. I need to go read some Scouting for Boys again. I may post my personal reflections on the paintball issue later, but I don't want to confuse them with this (IMO) more interesting issue.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

The Venture Crew of which I happily serve and contains such notable posters as Outdoor Thinker, has a Halloween Party scheduled at the Church that charters the Crew. Permission was given to have the party, but only after discussion as to whether or not the Church should be condoning such actvities which might encourage Devil Worship, Moral Deparavity, etc.

 

I would like to think that members of the Crew can differentiate between the fantasy of a Halloween Party and the actual black arts.

 

I would also think most Boy Scouts can make the connection, or perhaps in this case the disconnection that paint ball and laser tag are fun games, not actually tied to killing people.

 

 

(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[Rooster7 11]

To no one in particular,

 

I knew I was going to allow myself to be drawn in as soon as I made the first post sorryits a disease. ;-)

 

As posted by Neilup:

 

I had the opportunity a couple of days ago to talk with a member of the National Health and Safety Committee who is one of the custodians of the G2SS. I asked about the ban on laser tag and other things.

 

He said that any activity which

 

intends to do harm to another human being

mimics doing harm to another human being

imitates or simulates doing harm to another human being

 

is forbidden.

 

To me, the above as well intended as it may be is absolute political correctness. As OGE and FOG have pointed out, 11 to 17 year-old boys can differentiate between a game that demands strategy and the mock destruction of ones opponent and real war or mayhem.

 

Adrianvs,

 

In response to your post - I believe Baden Powell would roll over in his grave if he saw this thread. While he and others did not want Scouting turned into a paramilitary organization, Baden Powell saw the wisdom of preparing boys to become men including the possibility of war. In fact, the tracking skills that you described were not accidental or in spite of its implications, they were inspired by their real world application.

 

In case some folks are confused, I offer this. Although, I still maintain that boys know the difference between games and the real thing I dont believe we should shelter them from anything that might be considered useful should these boys find themselves in the real world even war, perhaps most especially so (i.e., Be Prepared).

 

Dsteele,

 

Let's not make Capture the Flag a restricted activity. Let's not make squirt gun fights a restricted activity. Obey the rules. Lazer tag is a restricted activity. We don't teach kids to hunt people. Leave that to the military. It is not our role.

 

You described FOGs comments as sarcasm. I disagree. The same logic that concluded paintball and laser tag as some sort of evil drove his conclusions. If you want to defend this position based on reason, you have to be willing to defend that line of reasoning when it is extended to its logical end. Capture the Flag and squirt gun fights have the same elements (simulated war, humans hunting humans, etc.) as laser tag and paintball. They may be allowed per BSA rules, but there are no distinguishable differences.

 

By using the same logic (posted by Neilup, and Dsteeles We don't teach kids to hunt people.), heres another activity that the BSA needs to restrict chess (and many other board games). It seems to be me, chess pieces represent noblemen such as bishops, kings, and queens (human beings) and the playing of the game simulates harm upon the same. You can discount this as sarcasm as youve done so with others, but as Ive noted It is the same flawed logic.

 

YES OBEY THE BSA RULES. I dont believe anyone said differently. But if a rule doesnt make sense, no one has an obligation to remain silent. Its just as responsible and noble to call attention to a bad rule, albeit through proper channels, as it is to obey the rules. While this forum doesnt qualify as proper channels, we are here to discuss issues and perhaps garner support for our views. Is there anything wrong with that?

 

[packsaddle 753]

dsteele, it occurred to me that my interest in this is not clear to you. I agree, in principle, with your intent and the intent of the reg. I just think the wording is unclear and leaves the regs open to just the sort of argument that you and poor Rooster7 have been drawn into. For the time-being I will avoid the gom jabar by accepting the regs, even if I disagree with something in them. However, the way they are written invites more such disagreement than should be necessary. I'm guessing that if laser tag was played with 'projectors' that looked like Care Bears, this would not be an issue? That would be ok, I like the Care Bears.

A note on chess. There are at least two ways to view the play. One view (say, the Bobby Fischer way) is that each piece taken is annihliated. Another way is to view taking the piece as 'taking' the piece out of play, not necessarily implying death, but rather implying prisoner. It still is militaristic, though, and the analogy to Capture the Flag is apt. I suppose another great field game has its days numbered.

[dsteele 20]

I have no problem with debating and discussing the issues. I try to provide rationale for rules. Folks wanted to know why laser tag is a restricted activity and I answered.

 

If you want to debate it, go ahead.

 

I like squirt gun fights -- but I don't agree that they are a war game. I suppose a squirt gun fight could play out like laser tag, in which case I would have trouble with it as a BSA activity. The squirt gun fights I've been a party to in Scouting were a way for us to keep Cub Scouts cool during hot days at Day Camp and they were free-for-alls and everyone got wet. There were no winners or losers. Everyone got wet and no one got "killed."

 

Similarly, the way we always played capture the flag was by taking "prisoners" to a "jail" where they could be freed by clever team mates.

 

The matter of shooting at human targets is further addressed in the G2SS under the firearms chunk, but I don't have one in front of me so I can't quote from it. However, I imagine someone else can.

 

Please remember that I work in a local council and am not part of the National Council. I am not a member of a National Committee and do not make the rules. I am, however, commissioned to follow them and see that they are followed to the best of my ability.

 

DS(This message has been edited by dsteele)

[NJCubScouter 1389]

I was content to just watch the continuing back-and-forth about laser tag and water pistols (I guess that is New Jersey-ese for squirt gun) until I saw Rooster say this:

 

But if a rule doesnt make sense, no one has an obligation to remain silent. Its just as responsible and noble to call attention to a bad rule, albeit through proper channels, as it is to obey the rules. While this forum doesnt qualify as proper channels, we are here to discuss issues and perhaps garner support for our views. Is there anything wrong with that?

 

Reading this gave me a brief involuntary coughing spasm.

 

No, Rooster, there is nothing wrong with that, and I couldn't have said it better myself -- and I'm not talking about laser tag or capture the flag. (I'm talking about something I can't talk about in Open Discussion.)

 

[Rooster7 11]

NJ,

 

And I knew it would before I ever hit the submit button. There is a line to be drawn. Did I really need to state that disclaimer? In my original post, I gave folks credit for knowing the obvious. Here is the obvious "line to be drawn":

 

Eventually - after you've made your complaint known, after you've gone through proper channels, after you discover the allegiance of most folks in an organization...If you find yourself standing in the nose bleed seats of the visitors' section, its time sit down and shut up...move on to another stadium or find another team.

 

In other words, if I discover that I hold the opinion of a small minority (i.e., the paintball rule is dumb), or the organizational powers-to-be are adamant about maintaining their position (complain as much as you like, but we have the authority and the rule stands), I think the noble thing to do is to accept the rule or reject the organization and move on. If we were talking about the ruling government of a country, I might reconsider that position, but we are discussing one of thousands of private organizations you, myself, and others have choices. If you don't like the menu, find a different restaurant.

[saltheart 10]

Ah...well said. No matter the subject or the place or time. That, Rooster, is probably one of the more succinct and well spoken statements of position and argument I've read in a very long time. Something very much worth remembering.

 

Well said...

[acco40 95]

To be more concise: "Pick your battles."

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"all the other kids had guns and played "army", but not me."

 

I'm wondering how many of your playmates grew up to be Mercenaries in the Congo, violent criminals, or mass murderers.

 

Thinking back to my childhood friends who played army, cowboys & indians and cops & robbers with me, only two would up in the armed forces. They became chefs, accountants, engineers, paramedics, and lawyers. No cops, robbers, cowboys, or indians out of the bunch.

[scoutldr 732]

Based on Rooster's G2ss discussion, I guess our annual "War on the River" at summer camp is a thing of the past. The kids will be heartbroken. It involved water balloons (simulated grenades), and swamping each others' canoes...in waist deep water. I guess we'll need another highlight of the week. A "speed-knitting" contest, perhaps.

[NeilLup 13]

Hello Rooster,

 

So that there isn't just frustration, it may be worth writing for a moment about what the proper channels are.

 

1) The less formal route is to write to the appropriate National Committee. Document your concerns and thoughts and mail them to the appropriate Committee.

 

I know of two cases where a single letter from a unit level scouter caused a change in national literature or in advancement requirements.

 

In the case here, it is a bit tougher since you are asking Health and Safety to change a policy which they have carefully considered. However, it certainly possible that a well written letter documenting ths history of Scouting and suggesting possible compromise positions would produce a result.

 

2) A more formal approach -- arrange for a formal submission of a resolution for action by the National Meeting. Such a resolution must be submitted by a voting member of the National Council. These are principally your Council President, Council Commissioner or one of the voting representatives elected by your council. The resolution is then read before the entire National Meeting and then likely referred to the appropriate Committee. However, due to the formal submission, consideration is probably taken a bit more seriously.

 

Either way, you are taking action rather than just talking about it.

[Davej775 10]

I played cops and robbers as a kid and I grew up to be a Constible of Peace(COP). I'm a Correction Officer in a prison. I'd like to think of myself as a decent ASM. After reading this entire thread I wonder, now, if my whole being is politically incorrect to be working with today's youth. I'm a Former Marine (which had nothing to do with being a former Scout.) Today's Scout uniform is almost identical to the Marine class 'A' and very unlike my Scout uniform of the 50's, so perhaps that needs to be changed. We as Scouts go camping, have patrols, have a bugler play taps at night and revelle in the morning. Flag ceremony is very formal. All I have described is very militaristic. How about the Declaration of Independence, the Liberty Bell, all American history is replete with the subject of war, armys, navys, etc. Scouting Magazine advertizes camping on the Lexington, thats the USS Lexington, a war ship! There's another war ship advertized for camping, too. (I'm at work and don't have the magazine in front of me.)

To be politically correct, and push the military under the rug along with squirt guns, and paintball guns because they imply or mimic war and battle, how can the BSA continue to have these ads in Scouting magazines, tolerate former vetrans of any branch of service as leaders, such as myself, and also continue to camp in the woods as military troops do?

If paintball was restricted because 'you could put an eye out with that thing' I'm behind you 100%. But that's not what I've read here. Pretty soon its going to be politically/socially bad to run faster than someone else, swim better than someone else, be smarter than....well, you get the point. I do not want my son to continue in a program which appears to shed a bad light on out History as a Country filled with military history. Without war we wouldn't have had a country. I've seen Scouts in Phildadelphia, the hotbed of revolt in the 1800's, seen Scout Troops at Fort Ticondroga and Fort William Henry. Perhaps these field trips are poor choices and will be off limits (oops! a military term....)to Scouts in the future.

Aside from war implications I want to add that just plain camping is risky with ticks, recluse spiders, and that everpresent element of fire at the campsite, the campfire. Ghost stories cause nightmares.... as real as this whole subject has been. I think the policy of anti-military is a bit overboard. Political correctness need not be addressed. The BSA showed that 2 years ago with leadership selection requirements. Enough said, I remain, Dave J775!