LongHaul

nldscout, God forbid you should find yourself in a leadership position when a youth is killed or seriously injured. I think you will find that the National Liability insurance is more for the protection of National than the individual leader. Many illusions are shattered when "something" happens and "someone is going to pay" replaces friendly, courteous and kind. One thing that remains constant is "Be Prepared". LongHaul

I remember an incident where a young man who would "slip" on occasion "slipped" while in ear shot of a young girl he liked very much. He was talking to a group of guys and she was standing near by with a group of girls. The look on her face and the realization of the damage done in his was apparent from across the room. The adults who saw this knew something had happened but we were to far away to have heard the actual utterance. The Scoutmaster Minute could address the concept of becoming comfortable with "socially unacceptable language" until you slip at the wrong time and find out how uncomfortable it can be. LongHaul

Please excuse any misspellings or punctuation I can hardly see through the tears and my sides ache from laughter. I've just related the following story to my significant other and she had to leave the room to catch her breath. I'm a baby boomer and attended school through out the 50's. We all were waiting for the Russians to attack and practiced Air Raid drills weekly in school. I live in the Chicago area and remember traveling down Lake Shore Drive and seeing the Nike Missiles being cleaned and serviced by the military. I was raised Roman Catholic and every Sunday we would say a prayer for the godless Russians that God would have mercy on their doomed souls. My concept of "Russian" was very confused because we were Polish and my Grandfather came from a town which used to be Poland but was now Russia. All I knew is that Russians were different, so different that Russia and America might start killing each other at any moment. My first summer at camp was full of wonders and things I had waited to see. I was caught by something new at every turn. We had a tradition in the dining hall of singing songs that involved individual tables taking verses so that the song would jump from table to table. Green Grows the Russian's Toes was one of those songs. Like all the other lengthy songs one would have to write lyrics down in order to commit them to memory. Some were on sheets but Green Grows the Russian's Toes was not one of them. I was 15 when I stood up in the dinning hall as a First Year Staffer and decided to lead the entire group in the singing of this perennial favorite. The look on the faces of the Leaders told me something was wrong but the hysterical laughter I was met with after I explain which song I wanted to sing and was informed of the actual title is something I'll remember for ever. "Green toes" isn't my nick name anymore either. I wouldn't trade my Scouting memories for anything. LongHaul (This message has been edited by LongHaul)

I've held off responding to Ed's request for suggestions because I have strong feelings about "alternate" requirements. I wanted to see what others had to say on this topic. Ed used the word "important" in describing an alternate requirement; scoutldr accurately quoted the advancement requirements which use the description as demanding of effort as the original requirement. My problem is deciding how to equate the level of demand of a particular task on an individual scout. Swimming was the first merit badge I earned as an 11 year old scout. I had been active in competitive swimming for two years prior to that and the demand of that merit badge was less than that of my second badge woodcarving. I also knew a scout who was pushing 18 at that time and had two merit badges left for Eagle, swimming and lifesaving because he just couldn't swim. How do we as outsiders evaluate demand. I can build signal towers and lash bridges but ask me to draw that structure after I've constructed it and I'm at a loss cuz I can't draw water. When we decide what level of demand to assign who are we using as a bench mark? We can't use the scout himself because we have already accepted that the task is beyond his ability. Do we try to decide how demanding the task is for the average scout? How do we do that? I really prefer Ed's original term "important what task has equal importance in the development of this scout. What was the purpose of the original requirement in achieving our goal in building the character and personality of this scout. What task will address the gap left by his inability to perform the original task. Swimming and Lifesaving were walks in the park for me but for my friend they were the hardest things he ever had to accomplish in scouting. LongHaul

Its Me, Scouting is the only organization for Cub/Webelos and 11 to 14 year old Boy Scouts, where the boy gets a chance to be indian and chief. He gets to help accomplish a goal and lead others in the accomplishment of a goal. He will have the great character builder of the chance to make someone elses vision a reality using yet again someone elses hands. By this I mean when he is in the learedship position for executing a plan he did not create. There are many team oriented activities but few where the team actually runs the program. I'd say stay but then I've been doing this since 1957. LongHaul

GOT CHA!!!!! He He He One hour a week, I could kiss the person who thought that one up:) Seriously don't take on too much or anything before you feel ready. This can really be fun and experiencing some Scouting moments with you child (children) can actually bring you top tears. Sunrise on the Tooth with my Father and 31 years later with both my sons comes to mind. Slow and steady, take ALL the training, have fun. LongHaul

When I posted before and said my troop had no silly rules I was joking, as Scoutmaster I approve all the rules the PLC makes before they are implemented. SSScout's post brought me back to something I was taught as a new staff person as a boy. "You are allowed zero mistakes on the shooting range or the water front" meaning the staff in this case. "If you make a mistake someone's life is, at that point, in jeopardy" Sometimes phrases like that just stick with you and cant be shaken loose. Problem is that today people just dont feel that way as SSScout says about the parent who thought he was to strict. Recently I was acting as lookout for our sailing base at summer camp when a sail boat capsized. A scout who was on shore and not checked into the water front crossed the rope barrier and swam out to the sail boat to assist. Completing the offense he didnt have a PDF on either. I signaled the Beach Master and was told to take a row boat and another scout and Get that kid out of the water!!! We approached the offending scout and threw him a Float and instructed him to take hold, to which we were told to go ####ourselves. He was then instructed to take hold of the row boat to which he answered screw you. Once back on land I confiscated his buddy tag and made a written report to the camp director. The next morning the boy had a brand new buddy tag issued by instruction of the camp director (because I destroyed his original one) with the explanation that we cant deny the boy access to the water front because he paid for the use of it in his camp fees. The boy's Scoutmaster was very angry and said that the water front staff and I in particular were blowing things out of proportion. When this thread started I was waiting for silly camp rules it might just be me but I havent heard any yet. I dont agree with a couple but dont by any means consider them silly. LongHaul

MaScout, Now I'm confused, you say that you thought Scoutnut was right and looked in your Baloo manual and find that she/he is. Right about what? The original point of contention was his/her statement that Webelos are NOT to camp without a parent. The passages you quote clearly state that the only requirement is that they be with a responsible parent or adult. So any adult will do not specifically a perent and further more that adult can also be responsible for other scouts. The question now is how many scouts per adult? Yes it's up to local councils to make that call but what are the decisions of the local councils represented by the members of this forum? Mine is 5 to 1, what's yours? LongHaul

BelieveinScouts, You have a copy of the Flying Permit. You speak of the materials you requested from the pilots so I'm lead to believe you've read the reverse side of the Flying Permit. You know that EAA Young Eagle Flights are specifically noted and specific information is requested. What ever you choose to do and whomever's advice you decide to take remember that if you are in charge you will be the one explaining yourself if "something" happens. Everything goes fine it's one thing, "something" goes wrong you better have followed all the rules. LongHaul

Scoutnut, I don't know what you are looking at but if you go to the link you provided and look at the fourth red highlighted section Youth Protection & Adult Leadership: Youth Protection in Scouting you will see a revision identified by the number 1. This revision discribes a change to the wording contained in the last parapragh of the section titled Barriers to Abuse Within Scouting. If you click on the red highlighted area it will take you to the online version of the relevant section. Scroll down to the last paragraph under Barriers to Abuse within Scouting and you will see that the revisions have not been made to the online version. None of the corrections are included in the text of the online version. Take a copy of the GTSS 33416E and you will find it word for word to be what is on line. The new revised version is designated as 34416F. LongHaul

Scoutnut, So how many youth can one adult be supervisor for at the same time?

Just remember that the online version is the old version you have to make the changes yourself, they can be found in "Updates" (which is the link Scoutnut gave us) but not all of them are spelled out. LongHaul(This message has been edited by LongHaul)

Lisabob, I don't understand. Wikipedia (IPA: [/ˌwɪkiˈpiːdi.ə/] or [/ˌwiki-/]) is a multilingual Web-based free-content encyclopedia.[1] It exists as a wiki, a type of website that allows visitors to edit its content; the word Wikipedia itself is a portmanteau of wiki and encyclopedia. Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers, allowing most articles to be changed by anyone with access to a computer, web browser and Internet connection. What's not legitamate about that? It's democracy in action! LongHaul

Scoutnut, First, I stand corrected, after reviewing my copy of the YP tape I see that you are indeed correct. The 1 to 5 is a local council rule and I am so used to reciting it I thought it was in the "ten point" section of the tape. As to the RULE for Cub camping we need to establish a definition of terms. Saying "x" is the rule and "y" is the accepted exception to that rule means that "y" becomes the line which can not be crossed and there fore the actual "policy" rule or guideline or law. It's the line that can not be crossed that is the issue not the line we all wish we could maintain. I would never want to hold a den meeting without another adult present but unfortunately that's not the "rule", two deep leadership is only the rule for outings, not meetings. One adult and at least two scouts is permitted. I accept that telling parents that one to one is not necessary is kinda like shooting yourself in the foot but telling them that National requires a one to one ratio is the same as telling them that wearing the uniform while traveling is required for insurance purposes. LongHaul

packsaddle, You are of course correct, I responded in the heat of the moment and should have looked up the title just to be sure. I really don't think it would have made a difference though, my point missed it mark anyway. LongHaul

Scoutnut, Again I will say the GTSS is in revision and things may change. Local Councils can an should decide exactly at what point a tour permit must be filled. Yes BALOO is designed for safety purposes in conjunction with camping but it also covers simple outdoor activities. Your local council can require BALOO training for a day at the Zoo. Concerning the event of the original post the operative term is "overnight". No matter where the "overnight" is held if it's within the Cub Scout Program BALOO is required. "A BALOO trained leader must be in attendance at each pack overnighter." is repeated in many publications and can be found in the Cub Scout Leaders Book under Basic Adult Leader Outdoor Orientation. scoutldr, Reinspection of Council approved camping facilities is only necessary when the Council feels it is required. The inspection form is used to get new facilities on the approved list. Like Lisabob's council mine never had a list, getting a permit was considered enough even though it is in direct violation of National policy. The approved camping list is supposed to guarantee a minimum standard for Cub Scout aged campers, without actually seeing the campsite (at some point) a council should never approve a permit for Cub Scout camping activities. Again with reference to the original post the question becomes is an indoor lock in camping? National is not specific on this, as far as I can find, so it becomes a local Council decision. My council hosts sleep ins at the Museums as do our neighboring councils. Again I stress things are changing, we never were required to get a permit to use Council owned camps, now we do. As has been noted in other threads actual registration is being required for adults attending long term camps. There is talk that Fast Start, NLE, and basic position training will soon be required for all adults attending long term camps, which is a total reversal of position which encouraged "parent" participation. Can't wait till I get a copy of the new GTSS. LongHaul

BrentAllen, No I'm not blind but I guess you are, "No, they were not justified in trying to stop the spread of freedom and democracy." is not an answer to whether Russia was justified in trying to stop WESTERN ECONOMICS. But hey forget it. Your statement that Russia was communist and Communist and thats all that matters says it all. You have no idea what either word means just that it's AMERICAN to be opposed to it. Wrap yourself in the flag and sleep in peace. LongHaul

cb2boys, Baloo is required for any activity held outside your normal meeting place, that's National policy. As for the museum being on the approved list that is a local council call. There is a form you can fill out to request an inspection, it's publication 13-508. I'd suggest you call you local council office unless you think they wouldn't be familiar with the museum your thinking about. Odds are your not the first to have this question. As to leadership requirements it depends on the age groups and your feelings on keeping tabs on the kids during the night. Im from Chicago and we have a number of museums which host scout lock in overnights. I've done the Planetarium and the Museum of Science and Industry with Cub Scouts. It was basically a parent for each scout but some parents brought siblings so there wasn't a one to one adult to child relationship. Also both events were attended by numerous packs. The kids liked it. LongHaul(This message has been edited by LongHaul)

BrentAllen, Havent you realized yet that your brand of smoke and mirror debate wont work with me. My definition was for what we are discussing communism with a small c your definition is for communism with a capital c. If you want to discuss that then I say it does not exist, what Russia practiced was socialism. United Social Soviet Republic remember, when they were in Afghanistan they were still the USSR. You glossed over the part where Russia didnt invade Afghanistan, or Hungry in 1955 or Poland in 1968 or Cuba in 1962! They were invited by the recognized government. Being of Polish decent and having relatives in Prague I have strong feelings about whether we should have assisted the Poles who objected to what their recognized government was doing but that doesnt change the facts. I doubt that you have actually read any of Marx or Lenin and only believe what you have been told, thats why you cant discuss the concepts. You may even believe that merly reading Marx or Leinin is anti american. Who wants to fight against freedom? You do, youd have us fighting to keep the Iraqis from having free choice if it didnt conform to your definition of freedom. The recognized government is the one we set up not the one they had in place. If Saddam was so bad to his people why didnt they overthrow him after Desert Storm when his army was at its weakest? Why hadnt there been a mass revolt and terrorist bombings against Saddam? The Iranians over threw the Shah so its not all that foreign to the region. As for Russia having to invade countries and force them into communism, please show me the US territory or protectorate where we were invited in. America, as a country, has been invading foreign countries since this country was founded. It was the way things were done thats all. Look up Manifest Destiny. Today we dont use invading armies we use invading industrialists. We convince governments to allow us into their markets without the consent of those governed because most of these countries dont have a democratic form of government. You blew right past my questions on the governments of Saudis, Kuwaitis, and that of the Emirates. You still havent answered the question I put in bold type. If we are justified in trying to stop the spread of Communism was Russia justified in trying to stop the spread of Western Economics? Western Economics ! Capitalism is what Russia feared just as we feared communism. McCarthy was not worried that the Communist Party of the United Statesof America was going to over throw the government. He wasnt worried that it would succeed in changing our form of government. He was afraid that it would affect the economic balance and put more power in the hands of minorities and blue color working people. The CPUSA was a prominent force in the early labor movements organized most of the industrialist unions. Big money just didnt want this to continue after the war and with the Cold War with Russia they had their 911. Disagree all you want but learn about what you are disagreeing with, look farther than what you are told by those in power. LongHaul

Scoutnut, First your local Council has the authority to tighten this rule. Your local Council can in fact require a 1 to 1 ratio but it must be done at the Council level. An individual Pack can require a 1 to 1 ratio but neither can go higher than 5 to 1. As for National policy I first refer you to the Youth Protection Training material revised 2004 which states that a 1 to 5 ratio must be maintained. As for this applying to Webelos how could it not unless other restrictions place tighter restraints on participants. Where most have a problem is reading what is actually written without injecting our view point. While I agree a one to one ratio is the best and should be strived for it's not a hard rule. Remember the GTSS has reportedly been totally rewritten and should be available at local Scout Shops soon. Everything may change when that happens. What the Outdoor Leader Skills for Webelos Leaders 13-33640 2005 printing says on this is ( I will use bold type for actual publication wording and regular type for my comments and explainations) Be sure participants understand that this is a parent-and-son event and every Webelos Scout must have a parent (or other adult) accompanying him on the overnight campout. The parent-and-son event reference makes us think of one to one but what if I have two sons or three or four. I can be there with more than one son and still fall under the parent-son event guideline. Each parent has a share of responsibility in planning and carrying out the campout. This is where the curve comes in. If a parent or guardian is unable to attend, the family should make arrangements with another adult family member or with the parent of another Webelos Scout (but not the Webelos Leader) to accompany the boy. At all times, a boy must be under the direct supervision of an adult. If the parent of another Webelos Scout can act as the adult for a scout in addition to their own son and no limit is placed on the number of additional scouts then the 1 to 5 rule comes into effect. The concept is to get a one to one ratio but not to force a Pack to deny participation to a boy whose parent can not attend. LongHaul

BrentAllen, Communism n. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members. You never did answer my question which I put in bold type so you couldn't miss it. You criticize others for not answering direct questions but you repeatedly refuse direct questions yourself. I'm not looking to find common ground. I'm trying to discuss political and ideological view points based on facts. I'm trying to find out why you are so predisposed to kill anyone who disagrees with you but fault the same characteristic in others. LongHaul

BrentAllen, "Yes, we were allies with the Russians in the war against Germany. 35 years later we were in an arms race with them." What about the intervening 35 years? The # 2,3 &4 make no sense because you seem to have blocked out 35 years of history. I got news for you we were in an arms race with Russia in 1947. McCarthyism began in 1950. You say We were also trying to stop the spread of communism. Im asking you a simple yes or no question If we are justified in trying to stop the spread of Communism was Russia justified in trying to stop the spread of Western Economics? You do realize that Communism is an economic reference and not a form of political government, dont you? By that I mean Democracy is not the opposite of Communism, you realize that dont you? Russia invaded Afghanistan History has a different take on that one too, the established government of Afghanistan at the time requested Russian support to hold off a coup by anti-government insurgents. I realize that the established government of Afghanistan at that time was Marxist so the US backed the insurgents but they were still insurgents and you have been very clear on how you feel about anyone finding fault with the established government. The thought of taking any disagreement with established policy to the point of armed insurrection should be abhorrent to you. Do you consider the people we were backing in that fight to be Anti-Afghanis? I realize that asking you to brush up on World History is asking a lot but at least get up to speed on the things you are trying to talk about. You fault me for following Ward Churchill and then fault me for not knowing who he is. You cry Monday morning quarterback but then fault Neville Chamberlin because Hitler violated the Munich Accord. If Chamberlin should have known better why not us with Bin Laden?What were Bin Ladens credentials when we picked him? All American nice guy? I find little justification for Chamberlins trust in Hitler's word but thats because Ive looked at the data and track records of the people in question. I'm in a position now to play monday morning quarterback. Chamberlin was not alone, and what would you be saying if Hitler hadn't invaded Poland in 1939 and WWII had been avoided? As for dealing with dictators first look up the word then the word tyrant then apply those definitions to the royal families in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the Arab Emirates. Do some background on the Shah of Iran, an old friend of ours, and then talk to me about dealing with dictators. You paint history as you need to justify your positions which are reached with no more justification than because others agree with you. You have any original thoughts of these subjects? LongHaul

BrentAllen, I dont know what your background is but I would think that from reading and participating in these forums you would have developed some skill in presenting your arguments. All you can do is spout your party line and attack the character of the people who disagree with you. You very seldom attack their argument or position. You start with By understanding Hitler, it makes things all better Better wouldnt be my choice of word, Id say clearer. You follow with It wasn't his fault, right? Where does that come from? Who said anything about blame? The opening statement was about understanding. I can seek to understand why you see things as you do without agreeing with you or disagreeing with you. You switch your focus then and say And if all Americans weren't decadent infidels does the mantra you subscribe to believe that the attacks were religiously motivated? Yes religion was used to manipulate the people actually doing the fighting but the motivation I'm speaking of is why those in power started the process in the first place. Is the current Pentagon thinking that this is a war about religion? I know what gets in the paper but you speak as though you have an inside track so Im asking. Personally I think Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are about as religious as Hitler was, which you probably know little about. I dont believe for one minute that Bin Laden cares a tinkers damn about our religious beliefs, he wants power and control. Why the Trade Center what religious significance did it have? The Pentagon what religious significance there? Why is not important to you as long as you have the ability to kill those who would stand against you. Its when they have the ability to kill you back that you become frightened. You talk about doing away with the 1st Amendment like its a bad thing, what about the Patriot Act you so wish to defend? What about the tactics used by our side against the alleged terrorists? Your next switch is a classic, again I d dont know your age or background. Were you alive during the Cold War? Do you know anything about the Russia which was spreading into the Middle East? I think not because if you did you would know that 1. They were our allies fighting another war we needed help winning. 2. We helped create the threat they posed us later. 3. We sought to fight them only when we feared them. 4. We used their alleged threat to justify our actions when our genuine motivations would have been rejected by the American public. You accept that Russia posed a threat to us and that they had to be stopped, or I should say your statement leads me to believe that you accept that Russia was a threat. That being the case is the reverse true? Do you think Russia saw us as a threat? A force which had to be stopped from spreading globally? If we are justified attempting to stop them are they justified in trying to stop us? Can you make those distinctions? You end with a valiant attempt at guilt by association, I must admit I had to Google "Ward Churchill" to get your jibe. Youd have a lot more credibility if you could allow you arguments to stand on their own merit. Try continuing this thread without personally attacking those who disagree with you. Try not using the inflammatory rhetoric and sarcasms and debate ideology and opinion. LongHaul

Ed, Your post really, I mean really amazed me. If Bush legalized full term abortion tomorrow you'd move to Canada without a peep right, I DOUBT IT! BrentAllen, You repeat yourself so often by now I think you really believe the tripe. "We were attacked by Al Qaeda so we invaded Iraq who had absolutely nothing to do with it! The UEA who did have a whole lot to do with it are our bosom buddies. Of course the UAE also helps VP Chaneys old bodies make lot and lots of money so I guess that makes it ok that they actually did and do support Bin Laden. Rent the movie and actually watch it, supporting the President and wanting to get the guys who harmed us does NOT make you a MaCarthyite. Its the belief that anyone and everyone who disagrees with you is ANTI-AMERICAN that does. You have no idea why we were attacked and you dont care. You wont care until Al Qaeda brings the war to Dunwoody GA. Then just maybe you might ask why but I doubt it. You believe that America can do no wrong and thats not only wrong its dangerous. As Americans we have more to fear from people like you starting wars than from people like Saddam. Why is it you never mention the fact that AMERICA started the Al Qaeda and put Bin Laden in power in the first place? Selective amnesia? LongHaul

BrentAllen, You should rent or better yet buy a copy of "Goodnight and Good luck". You brand of patriotism is so like McCarthys it's laughable. Anti BrentAllen is Anti American, Anti George Bush is Anti American. Just because I seek to try and understand WHY my enemy fights me does not mean I become my enemy. Understanding why Hitler hated Jews does not make me anti-Semitic. I'm sorry to cloud your bubble but this is not a monarchy and GWB is not America. GWB does not represent American values he represents GWB's values which many Americans agree with. Those who do not agree are not anti American. How could you still consider yourself a loyal American under Clinton? How will you reconcile your patriotism under the next president who will probably not share your views? LongHaul (This message has been edited by LongHaul)