-
Posts
9103 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Everything posted by packsaddle
-
I spend more time dealing with the adults and running interference between them (evening phone conversations usually) than for interactions between the boys. There is no easy answer to your problem because every adult is unique and you seem already to have a good feeling for the people involved. For situations like you describe, Ed's approach is similar to what I have used effectively. I thank them for their interest and invite them to volunteer to organize a troop activity. Sometimes we get a really great troop experience as a result. I approach each adult with the assumption that I must address their concerns from step one, every time. That's why it takes so much time. When two adults are having a problem I remind them that this is not about 'them', but rather it's about the boys. Usually that redirects their thoughts. Either they get tired of me and give up, or else it works so far, I'm not sure which.
-
Overtrained, I like that one. I was thinking, "A scout is honest".
-
Dan, regarding your complaint about complaints, I just wanted to try to break the mould with a positive comment (a contrarian's way of agreeing). Indeed, beautiful weather, memories of the eclipse, students happy, pants on in right direction, couldn't be better.
-
dsteele, until people start throwing paper cups at me I repeat (again and again): I like the fit, the feel, and the look of the official pants. Considering the length of duty one can expect from them, the price is not THAT bad (FOG is going to get me for that one). So there, Dan. Have a nice day
-
What was/is the highest rank you have achieved...
packsaddle replied to hops_scout's topic in Open Discussion - Program
le Voyageur, other veterans: On the eve of Armistice Day, I salute you. -
Colin Powell and the Archbishop of Canterbury
packsaddle replied to Eamonn's topic in Scoutmaster Minutes
Great statement by a great man. I am sure Powell was not thinking about the war with Mexico, though, a huge land grab by a stronger nation over a weaker neighbor. -
What was/is the highest rank you have achieved...
packsaddle replied to hops_scout's topic in Open Discussion - Program
OK, I tried. NeilLup, while it may not be agreeable to some others, OGE (or anyone in the forum for that matter) is free to question anything they want within the rules of decorum. Everyone else is free to consider or to ignore them (as happens frequently to me). No big deal. That said, you are also free to voice your objections. Have at it. -
What was/is the highest rank you have achieved...
packsaddle replied to hops_scout's topic in Open Discussion - Program
Answer to original question: Eagle with bronze God and Country ASM -
Semi-safe Central American non-tours
packsaddle replied to dsteele's topic in Open Discussion - Program
OK, skip the resort nonsense and drive around the Yucatan in Mexico, hitting all the big Mayan sites. Then keep going across the mountains to Oaxaca. THAT town is a real gem. The ruins are Zapotec at Monte Alban and Mitla, others nearby. Spectacular! Plenty of stuff to do and you'll love the market there. At Christmas they have a radish festival that is a real trip. It's my favorite place in the country. If you want some more water keep going to the Pacific coast, great undeveloped beaches. Want an adventure? Drive to Mexico city from Oaxaca on the backroads, should take most of a day. Stop at every available gas station, there were two when I did it. Pay no attention to the dirt road that you're on when the map says it's paved. If a truck knocks the door off your car, duct tape it back on and keep on going. There is a town on that route (Teotitlan, I think, maybe Tehuacan) that has really nice pottery. Take a dummy wallet to sacrifice to the odd thief. I was robbed at an inspection station on that route - don't ask THEM for directions. But if you do, have a dummy camera or CD player ready to sacrifice. When they accuse you of something and threaten you with prison have your wife start crying and you just hold your wrists out for the handcuffs. That usually backs them off a little. They just want a payoff. Have a great trip! -
Here's the url for the exhibition: http://www.metmuseum.org/special/Bravehearts/skirts_more.htm It's called 'Bravehearts: Men in Skirts' Spectacular!
-
Adrianvs, I think the first mention was by Twocubdad and I thought you were just continuing in that spirit. Anyway, 'excited' is hardly the term I apply to my reaction. My reaction is great laughter at the thought of what I'd look like in a kilt and halter top. You get it yet? If not then add the panties to the image. Remember this is at Scout Camp. See my point?
-
Semi-safe Central American non-tours
packsaddle replied to dsteele's topic in Open Discussion - Program
Belize is safe, English is the national language but many natives make an effort to speak it (first language is Mayan). The ruins are good but better in Mexico (my opinion). The best thing about Belize is the barrier reef (2nd largest in the world) and it is still in pretty good condition (compared to the Keys - 3rd largest - really sad shape and getting worse). My first choice is still Costa Rica. Absolutely safe. I flew my young family there years ago, rented a car, and winged it. Never been there before. We had a great time. Absolutely safe. The worst you might experience is a pickpocket (unlikely). No ruins but the natural features are spectacular, magnificent volcanic mountains, cloud forests, wildlife, wild rivers, waterfalls, beaches. I can recommend a great undiscovered hotel in San Jose (former presidential palace) and endless places to explore. Plus Scouting is a big deal there. I'll be going again during spring break as well. -
andrewcanoe, Ooooooooohhh, haaaalter toooops. Another delicious image is forming. Adrianvs, Ok, what's this obsession with skivies? What is a skivy anyway? Do regulation skivies really exist?
-
EAMONN, In my post I mentioned that WE do not allow certain items. In this troop 'WE' means the collective decision of the boys, the parents, and the leaders. This has been agreed because of previous experience of massive time wasted looking for lost gameboys, and anguish over CD players that were ruined by rain. Most of the boys don't have cell phones and they outvote those that do. None of them really need cell phones for our trips as the leaders give them free access to the leaders' phones. 'I' suggested the exception for long trips because I saw the utility of giving them something to do while sitting for long stretches. They agreed to that as well but some of them still leave their stuff at home (largely out of the experience of having lost them in the past). I respect their decision. If a parent has a special need we are always sympathetic and try to accommodate that need. It works for us.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)
-
Are you kidding? I thought everyone waxed these days! (OK, maybe that knobby knee thing was uncalled for)
-
We don't allow cell phones except for adult leaders and use them only when necessary. We try to take at least one cell phone on trips - even backpacking and similar trips. This has really saved us a couple of times (one boy had a relative who died unexpectedly, other examples). For short trips we don't allow any electronic devices including radios, CD players, etc. For long trips CD players, etc. are allowed for the travel only.
-
This mental image is just tooooooo delicious. I arrive at summer camp with the troop. All the counselors and troop leaders are wearing kilts. White, flabby, hairy legs and knobby knees, ample bellies hanging over. I make my way to the trading hut to get mine so I can join in. The boys are really quiet, just a little nervous. It'd make me proud. I think it's a great idea. You know this would make a great cartoon. H'mmmm
-
Proud Eagle, I confess to being the source of your confusion. I was raving and ranting in response to popcorn anxiety and I related the discussion to 'Ghost Busters' and some language peculiarities (Two great nations separated by a common language). I apologize. Popcorn sale is over now and I hope things are back to normal. Bob White and FScouter, nicely said.
-
Rooster7, If you want to think of me as a liar that is your right. However, I quote what the FBI has figured. If you can find a more authoritative source of information I am willing to consider it. The South: 6.7 murders per 100,000 The Northeast: 4.2 murders per 100,000 These are the 2001 figures. For your information, determination of a 'rate' takes into account population size and relates the data on a per capita basis. The figures I quoted before are taken from the report's Table 2 entitled, "Crime Index Trends". As stated before, the South increased 2.1% over the period and the Northeast decreased 4.8% over the same period. You will have to contact the FBI for more detailed figures for the different regions. However, the individual states display a large range of differences within both death-penalty and non-death-penalty states. What this suggests is that the controlling factors for differences in murder rates are not related to the death penalty. Studies of paired neighbor states in which one is pro-death, the other not, have also shown large differences - the pro-death states have higher murder rates. This observation removes some of the regional differences in education and economic status that might not have been considered in the state-to-state comparisons. I just read that by a large majority, criminologists as a group and police chiefs as a group believe evidence does not support the death penalty as a deterrent. You can argue with the police chiefs on your own time. Internationally, comparisons have been made between USA and some countries that do not have the death penalty: MURDER RATES (per 100,000) over the 3-year period of 1997-1999 USA-------------6.26 Sweden--------1.94 Netherlands--1.66 France---------1.63 Italy-------------1.56 UK---------------1.45 Germany-------1.28 Source: British Home Office I will try to locate a more comprehensive list for other countries as well.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)
-
OK, I'll start it off for all the pro-death persons: The FBI issued a report this summer that had information on this subject. You can get your own copy at: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_02/02prelimannual.pdf In it is data that shows that the South with 82% of executions since 1976 had an INCREASE in the murder rate of 2.1%. In contrast, the Northeast, with less than 1% of the executions had a DECREASE in the murder rate of a little less than 5%. So this is some evidence AGAINST the deterrence argument. Still waiting.....
-
The better question would be: How many innocent persons would I kill to prevent murders from happening (any number you wish)? Answer, I would not kill a single innocent person. I do not support the contention that public safety depends on my willingness to kill innocent persons. There is nothing logical about that contention. Edited part: I ask again... For those who argue that the death penalty is a deterrent, I ask 'How much?' How do murder rates compare between countries that do and do not have the death penalty? Which countries still support the death penalty anyway? What is the result of a similar comparison between states that do and do not have the death penalty? How much of a deterrent is it? The comparisons should provide a metric for that question.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)
-
Thanks OutdoorThinker, saved me a little time. OGE is, I think, trying to convey the idea that our knowledge is often less than certain. Some of the death row inmates that have been freed were convicted of heinous crimes, convincingly by eyewitness testimony. It is only later, in the face of DNA evidence or similar hard evidence that those witnesses admit that they weren't that certain. I think that convicting and killing an innocent person should be avoided, even at risk of letting a guilty one go free. Remember, when an innocent person is convicted, two injustices are done. One to the innocent person, the other injustice is that the guilty one went free anyway. With life without parole, if later evidence is found that exonerates the individual, then freedom is again available. The death penalty takes all options away. There is a probability that for every wrongfully executed person, there is a real criminal that wasn't convicted of that crime. The execution might have satisfied the public's blood lust, but in those cases it is justice neither for the victim, nor for the convicted. For those who argue that the death penalty is a deterrent, I ask 'How much?' How do murder rates compare between countries that do and do not have the death penalty? Which countries still support the death penalty anyway? What is the result of a similar comparison between states that do and do not have the death penalty? How much of a deterrent is it? The comparisons should provide a metric for that question.
-
2 am, my ISP went dead. My first thought, solar flare! So I dashed out to see the AB. No luck, too far south.