Jump to content

Beavah

Members
  • Posts

    8173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by Beavah

  1. Yah, hmmm... We make up the most interestin' fictions when we don't actually listen to kids. I'm with my fellow Beaver SR540 when he talks about Uniform Method being about more than just clothing, but instead being about how we treat each other and work together. Regardless of whether you're a "full uniform" troop, though, the reality is that most of da work we do with kids is or should be in the outdoors, and in the outdoors we wear outdoor clothing. And that's not "uniform", eh? So when boys gear up for anything but the parlor, which should be most of what we do, they aren't "equal" and everybody knows it. And even in uniform everyone also knows the lads who have the don't-quite-fit-not-the-newest stuff from the uniform closet, too. As SR540 points out, they even know what cars their parents drive on the outing (and which ones are equipped with video ). Baden-Powell lived in a different era, eh? In his era, putting boys in shorts and field wear was considered almost rude, and even worse for adults. It was the equivalent of wearing jeans and ball caps. He picked a "uniform" that was functional, low-cost, adventurous outdoors-wear for the time, that scandalized the folks who felt that young men should be properly attired and look sharp. Show me a fastidiously uniformed troop these days and by and large you'll find "well-rounded" over-50 adults who really aren't models of outdoor adventure and mostly do car campin', but who do like to adult-run things. SR540 is right, the Uniform Method is more about kids' identification and how we and they treat each other. It's not about conformity or obedience or make-believe nonsense about clothing being some form of communist equality. Uniform Method is worthwhile, and worth workin' on with kids together, but only if we're clear about our Aims and honest with ourselves and our lads. Beavah
  2. Yah, I think fred8033 has the right of this. This is a new process, folks. It very definitely shifts the burden of decision making from the pre-project approval to the Eagle Board of Review. That's a change for most of us who used to feel that we should be thorough in the pre-project review so that the boy would know for sure that it would pass muster at his EBOR. That is no longer the case. Pre-project reviews in that level of detail have been deprecated. Like fred8033, I'm all in favor of the change. I think da pre-project review process in most places had gotten out of hand. More to the point, it was fundamentally different from anything the boy had been doing in Scouting. An Eagle project should proceed along the same lines as a lad's other scouting leadership experience, eh? Yeh come up with an idea, the PLC and the Troop Committee approve the basic plan, and then yeh go to it. That means, however, that approval of the basic plan is not sufficient to ensure that the project will pass muster at an EBOR. Just like the Troop Committee approving the annual calendar doesn't mean that the Klondike is goin' to fly when it comes time. We all have to readjust our way of thinkin' about this stuff. Beavah
  3. Yah, that's interestin', KC9DDI. I know others that really liked it and are still passing around PDF copies of it because they felt it was great. I'm a bit more in the middle, though I thought it was fine. What did yeh think was missing? Are yeh usin' the BSHB for those things, or are yeh using something else for support?
  4. So, if we say jeans are ok, those who wear Wal-mart jeans get showned up by those who wear Cabelas, Lands End or LL Bean Jeans. The whole idea of the uniform is that it it starts off with every one the same (uniform as it were) and then the patches show what the member has done, where they are from, what they have gone. Do boys actually pay attention to what brand of jeans people wear? That strikes me more as a girl type thing. I think kids always know the score. Yeh can tell who got the hand-me-down or uniform-bank uniform and who bought one fresh off the full-price National Supply rack. But even if yeh couldn't yeh can tell who got the new backpack and who borrowed an old one, who has the latest Goretex rain jacket and who is skimping with the WalMart special poncho. Pretending that a BSA uniform somehow makes kids equal has always struck me as kind of silly. I agree that a decked-out uniform tells yeh some of the scout's "resume" at a glance. But then that would only apply in a place where a resume would be required, eh? In public when meeting strangers who care about such things; maybe at a district-level EBOR. For all da rest of it, the boy's patrol buddies and unit leaders are goin' to know a lot more about his scouting history than what's on his uniform, eh? Like the fact he makes a great pancake but forgot his sleeping bag on the last Klondike. Beavah
  5. Yah, in the previous thread, Eagle92 commented on how he couldn't use the BSHB as part of IOLS because it was missing too much information on outdoor skills. Seems like that's a worthy avenue for discussion. Are other folks finding the same thing? Are yeh supplementing the BSHB with other resources? I know one unit that used to buy the BSA Fieldbook for all its scouts, but now that's out of print. Beavah
  6. I always find it interesting that most scout camps have the rules as the scout oath and law.... Otherwise, the whole camp runs under the oath and law. You're jokin', right? Have yeh ever thumbed through the National Camp Standards book? I reckon it's a mite longer than da Oath and Law. And procedures? Egad! Bring medical forms, do medical check-ins, store medications here, get medications there, check in to waterfront here, move tag there, sign up for MB using this form at this registration process, fill out Blue Card and deposit here, pick up Blue Card there, send hopper to dining hall at this time, pick up stuff here, put cleaning stuff there, set a rule that everyone has to drink XX glasses of water at lunch, .... BSA Summer Camp by and large is the most over-bureaucratized youth experience yeh can find. In some camps, boys spend all of Sunday marching from program area to program area being told procedures and rules. On camp accreditation, I spend most of my time sayin' stuff like "Yeah, but what about customer service?" I'm with yeh on most of your examples. As a Commish, I'd be sittin' with folks and askin' whether they really felt their procedural stuff was necessary or worth it. Again, though, it just depends. In a small to mid-sized troop where the SM knows everybody and can put in a huge amount of time, yeh can do with less. But yeh hit a certain size, and then a quiet, more shy boy gets lost in the shuffle with so many things goin' on. Having a set of "requests for SM conferences" or other such tracking efforts helps bigger units to make sure lads don't get lost and adult time gets used effectively. Once boys learn the system, it's not a big deal. Yep, our first question of ourselves should be "Yeah, but what about service to the boys?". But within that, some procedure stuff is OK. And we have to be wary of the tendency of thinkin' that just because we wouldn't do things that way that it's necessarily a bad thing for other people in other situations to do. Beavah
  7. My favorite SMCs and BORs are the ones done on campouts and at camporees. Getting adults from other units to help sit in always gave the Scout insight to other point of views about scouting and see toe larger picture. No doubt someone will jump in and tell yeh that it's against da rules and procedures (only committee members or parents on BORs), or that yeh need to have a formal setting or whatnot. I agree with yeh, though. BORs in the field, 'round the campfire or over hot cocoa, dressed for the weather not for show... those have always felt the best and most natural to me. And to the boys, I think. Beavah
  8. The reason is that the new folks start seeing processes and procedures as the normal Boy Scout way. They don't realize it's a troop decision to handle a transition or teach a lesson. As such, those new processes and procedures tend to be permanently installed. I agree with that, to a point. I'm a strong advocate for not goin' the G2SS route and establishing a set of rules for everything, or opting for a procedural response as a result of incidents rather than trends. Incidents yeh respond to as incidents much of the time, addressin' just the individuals or particulars. However, I think you're makin' three mistakes. One is believing that every unit leader has the same style and interpersonal skill set that you might have. Yep, some unit leaders have a skill set and communication style that's able to pull off "creative" group dynamic solutions. I prefer that myself. But yeh don't have to visit too many units before yeh realize that not everybody is that good at it. Others like artjrk like the consistency and order of havin' a simple notebook procedure. That's not so bad, is it? The second is believing that others will always respond appropriately to that sort of interpersonal approach. Generally speakin' it only works when there's the sort of person Eagledad talks about - the long-time, well-respected person in the unit who is alpha-dog "keeper of the vision". Someone who has a lot of social capital with the group. I expect that you fill that role in your troop. But again, when units are in da stormin' and rebuildin' phase, that person usually hasn't emerged yet, so there's nobody who has the social capital to be able to pull off many of the "creative" solutions. The third is assumin' that other units are as monoculture as yours might be. That's not a bad thing, mind. Most good troops are pretty monoculture - draw from the same neighborhood, attract the same sort of folks at crossover. Makes it easier for sure, but isn't always the case. Systems of law and procedure are what we fall back on when da conflicts can't be resolved through more ordinary processes. They're also a way of communicatin' norms and expectations in contentious or diverse environments. When a group norm is already well established, yeh can make exceptions out of compassion, eh? And yeh should. Artjrk can handle a lad who forgets to sign up in da notebook and comes to him mid-meeting. But when a group norm is not yet well established, da compassionate thing to do for everyone in the group is to stick to the norm. Artjrk says "Yeh have to sign up in the notebook." I always tell folks that most groups can accept about 15% deviation. A patrol can handle one, at most two kids who are behavioral outliers. More than that and things start fallin' apart. A group can handle makin' exceptions for maybe one out of eight of the cases. More than that and da exception starts becoming expected, or people feel you're playin' favorites, and things start fallin' apart. So if yeh only have a few lads who are pushin' the envelope on demanding adults be there at their beck and call, yeh can deal with it individually. More than that, though, and yeh either have to fall back on procedure or the alpha dog has to "creatively" lay down the law. Either works, and both have downsides. Procedure can outlast its usefulness, that's true, but relyin' on the alpha dog makes for really rough transitions and can cause some folks to withdraw (or revolt) along the way. All things in balance. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)
  9. Yep, I'd agree with that, fred8033, at least much of the time. Often enough, though, a unit has had some leadership turnover, had a few years where things got lax, had a big group of new Webelos III parents come in, etc. So it's not a question of an individual, eh? It's a question of tryin' to (re-) establish norms for the group. That's when puttin' in place formal processes and procedures helps. It helps folks learn and adjust and helps the group improve. Then, as a healthy unit culture re-emerges, yeh can let the procedural stuff fade, because the good lessons from it have "taken" and will self-perpetuate for a while. There's no need to get bogged down in the negative aspects of procedure. Until the next time there's turnover, things get lax, a big group of inexperienced folks come in, etc. Beavah
  10. Beavah, you're over analyzing it. The point is that teams and organizations have uniforms that identify them and there are times when as a part of that team or organization, you are expected to wear the uniform, the whole uniform. Yah, but those times are only when performing a show in public. And then they get out of 'em as fast as they can (though sometimes, with somethin' like a football jersey with their favorite player's number, they might wear shirt only ). I think boys would be OK wearin' the uniform when doin' a show in public. That's not what we ask 'em to do, though. We ask 'em to wear it at meetings, and traveling, and dining, and all kinds of other things. Stuff that no other group does. And then we make up nonsensical justifications like "it helps identify you". What, do your buddies in your patrol not know you after all these years? I'm a supporter of da Uniform Method, and I reckon everyone knows I don't like the shirt-with-jeans thing. But I think we have to start from a position of being honest with the lads. I'm also with desertrat77 on the outdoor aspect. Let's face it, outdoor adventure is very cool. So cool that yeh can't sit through a TV show without at least a few commercials tryin' to play off the "I'm adventurous!" theme. Everything from cars to deodorant. Do yeh honestly know any kids who wouldn't wear their North Face jacket to school? Our problem is that we are bogged down by a bunch of old fogeys who like to dress in kids' clothing, and who then try to turn active kid wear into something between what they'd wear on a parade ground and what they'd wear to a corporate board meeting. Complete with worrying about whether the pants iron well to hold a sharp crease! B
  11. Yah, everything in balance, eh? I agree with fred8033's "nice and simple" example, but then I've seen a lot of other things work just fine. Includin' a few of fred8033's supposed "bad" examples, like helping a boy at Life get some of da experience he's going to need to do a good job on some of the Eagle requirements. Advancement is just one tool, and yeh have to use it in different ways. If yeh have a bunch of lads who feel like they're entitled to adult attention and time and that's showin' in their behavior, then I reckon the proper lesson is to teach them patience and courtesy. On the other hand, if yeh have a bunch of lads who are scared of adults and find it too hard to approach 'em, then yeh reach out and bridge the gap. Mostly, for the upper ranks, I'd expect a lad to be able to do things like make an appointment. That's no more adding to the requirements than asking him to fill out an Eagle Scout application. If there's anything that's true, it's that when yeh ask an Eagle Scout which badges mean the most to him, they will always be the badges where the counselor was the fellow who made sure the scout really earned the badge, who protected the integrity of da process and held the lad to high standards. Beavah
  12. As for Syria, the US is following the middle east, not the other way around. Exactly. B
  13. Could you see a guy showing up for the NY Giants bootcamp, saying he really likes the team and playing football, but insists on wearing his own pants (jeans). Or deciding to wear your own color and style jersey to play with the Lakers. Yah, not to belabor the point, but the analogies just don't work. Yeh get paid to don the uniform of the Giants or the Lakers. And they provide the uniform. And even then, yeh don't wear the uniform at practice, yeh don't wear the uniform at team meetings, yeh don't wear the uniform when traveling, yeh don't wear the uniform at award ceremonies. And the coaches don't wear the uniform. If that's our model, then the boys should wear the uniform only when they're performing a show in public, only if they are paid, and only if we provide the uniform. And we adults should dress like adults, not like da kids who are playing. I think we can make a case for uniformin', but not by way of analogy to sports or the armed service or school bands. Scoutin' as a kids' program is its own thing. Beavah
  14. I miss Hillary. JoeBob lets loose with a statement like that, and nobody takes him up on it?? Just lettin' yeh know I at least was payin' attention, Joebob. I was thinkin' the other day that in actual fact, Hillary Clinton has made a superb Secretary of State. She's been marvelously astute, respectful of other nations but firm, and is a master of manipulating people usin' their underlying interests. Here we have the whole world, even the Arab world, siding with the U.S. over Syria and condemning the Russians and the Chinese. And in the same month, we have the EU takin' the lead on pushing punitive sanctions against Iran. That's just masterful. Great use of soft power, great long-term vision for advancing American interests. Probably the smartest appointment Obama made, and quite a change from da Bush years when it seemed like we couldn't even get our friends to support us on obvious stuff without payin' 'em. Beavah
  15. When the baseball team is playing a game or the marching band is marching on the field, yes they are all in matching uniforms. In other words, when they are performing in public they are in matching uniforms. But not the adults, eh? And even the lads on the sidelines might well be out of uniform or have it covered up. When they are at a team meeting, they aren't in uniform. When they are at a practice, they aren't in uniform. When they are at an award banquet at the end of the season they aren't in uniform. When they get together with fellow band kids from other schools at summer band camp they aren't in uniform. So if we're really sayin' we should be like sports or band programs, then the only time the lads should be in uniform is during a formal public performance of some sort, and only while they're performing. For all da rest, they should be in T-shirts. And the adults should never be in a copy of the kids' uniform, but should instead dress like adults. At least that's my answer, SR540. Can't imagine why some bright young scout hasn't landed it on yeh by now. JoeBob, I think you've got da right of it. If yeh establish some solid internal guidelines of the sort yeh suggest, I think you'll both look more uniform and you'll find yeh get more buy-in from everyone from the boys to the womenfolk. Beavah
  16. Yah, back to Aims, eh? A lot depends on what yeh feel you are tryin' to accomplish with the Uniform Method. I think the units that don't have a good sense of their goals are the ones that have the most trouble with uniforming. They're the ones that are doin' what somebody mentioned, and being lax day to day and then hyper-strict at BORs, or who have one or two adults who are Senior Inspectors of the Uniform Police while everybody else rolls their eyes a bit. As a Commish, I feel my role is mostly to help units figure out how to use each of da methods to accomplish their goals, and long ago gave up on the notion of expecting everyone everywhere to pay lots of money to National Supply. I reckon I've seen about 3 or 4 methods of uniform wear that I think work fairly well. 1) By-the-book, plus. Everyone wears the same or very similar version of the stock uniform. Troop pays for matching shoulder loops, custom unit numbers, etc. and maintains an active uniform bank. Usually has a custom necker as well, might have a common hat, but probably doesn't fight about socks, shoes, belts, necker slide, whether da OA sash is appropriate, etc. Generally allows some minor personalization / fun (whacky patrol patches, "Untrainable" patches, local awards, etc.). Uniform worn at all scout events and during campout travel. Looks sharp, is almost always adult-driven but the kids will buy in as long as there's some fun and personalization. I'd include in this group some troops that specify a few look-alike pant alternatives. 2) Shirts only. As others have mentioned, this is very common in da rest of the world. Problem is the BSA shirt is typically more gaudy/less outdoorsy than most of da rest of the world's shirts, so it doesn't go as well with the less formal style. Jeans is most common, though it ain't my personal favorite. Sometimes you'll see shirts only for outings/meetings, but full dress for formal events. This approach I reckon is the one that's most prevalent, and reflects a mix of wanting to identify as scouts and wanting to be functional/thrifty/not get bogged down in uniform debates. More likely to see in youth-run units. 3) Uniform only for public functions where being identified is important (some service projects, COHs, Scout Sunday). Similar to how we adults use uniforms in da real world, where folks wear a uniform when they are doin' work that requires it to be easily identified to non-members (police officer on duty, physician while working, etc.). For meetings/outings within da unit, wear what is practical. This tends to be the norm for units that do a lot of outdoors stuff, including outdoor meetings. 4) Un-uniformed but wearing a token of membership. Da classic version of this is international scouting, where wearing just the necker is extremely common, particularly in countries where affording a separate shirt is a struggle. As close as I can tell, all of 'em develop a sense of identity and da sort of character-building that can come from uniforming, but each with a different tone. Honestly, if yeh look at international scouting the one that shows by far the most youth buy-in and real scout spirit is #4. Beavah
  17. In my experience, da strength of the scouting program has only a little bit to do with the program itself. Mostly, it is dependent on the strength of the volunteers in it. Scout Salute, Basementdweller.
  18. Yah, so I was thinkin' about the "hypothetical" thread and I sort of thought that perhaps folks needed some sort of guide on where, when, and how to complain about stuff. So let me try, and then others can fill in, and maybe others can join in and we'll have a thread we can refer "hypotheticals" to. You're a scouter, and you think a boy may being abused or neglected at home Call Child Protective Services in your state (there's often a hotline number) and file a confidential report. Yeh may discuss your concerns with a professional in your chain of command (Chartered Organization if a unit scouter, Scout Executive if a district or council scouter) if yeh need advice/perspective, but with no one else. (Yeh are not granted immunity from tort action for slander if yeh talk to anyone else). If you believe the child is in imminent danger or have direct evidence of abuse, call law enforcement. You're a scouter or parent, and you have evidence that a boy has been physically or sexually abused by anyone outside of the home Call law enforcement. If the abuser is a scouter or the abuse happened in scouting, also call the Chartered Organization Representative and Head of the Chartered Organization (if in unit scouting), and the Council Scout Executive. You're a scouter and you feel a boy is being bullied by a peer Deal with it, that's your job. Work with the other scouters to protect the kid and take appropriate disciplinary action. Involve the troop committee if appropriate to consider removing the bully from the program. You're a parent and you feel your son is being bullied by a peer Tell the scoutmaster/unit leader and explain your concern rationally and in detail. Give the SM some time and space to address the matter, and work collaboratively with him/her. If the bullying continues or gets worse, notify the Committee Chair and Chartered Org. Rep. and move your son to a new troop. You're a parent and you feel your son is being "bullied", yelled at inappropriately, disciplined unfairly, etc. by the scoutmaster or one of the other scouters. Give it a few days to calm down, then make arrangements to talk to the scouter in question at a time and place where you can speak frankly. Share your concerns. Listen carefully to his/her side and promise to think about it. If things continue or get worse, notify the Scoutmaster, Committee Chair, and/or Chartered Org. Rep, and move your son to another troop. You're a parent and you feel that your son's scouting program is doing something unsafe. Make arrangements to talk to the Scoutmaster at a time and place where you can speak frankly. Be open-minded; some things that seem unsafe (ex. rock climbing) are really very safe. If you still aren't comfortable, don't let your son participate in that activity, or consider another troop. Send a note to the Chartered Org. Rep. about your concern. You're a parent and you're upset about some issue of advancement for your son. Despite how hard it is, give your son some time and space to work through it himself. Advancement is like a sports game, sometimes the referees make a poor call, but it still isn't good form to argue balls and strikes with the umpire. Try not to take it too seriously. If there's somethin' that's persistent, make arrangements to talk to the Scoutmaster at a time and place you can speak frankly. Consider making respectful, patient use of the BSA appeals process if necessary, but in that case also move your son to another troop. You're a unit scouter or parent and are upset by the actions of a district or council volunteer or professional Make an appointment to talk with the person in question privately at a time and place yeh can have a good conversation. If after doin' so the problem continues, speak with the person's supervisor (Camp Program Director, Camp Director, District Commissioner, Scout Executive, etc.). Be respectful, and share your concern. If yeh feel it necessary, address the matter to your Chartered Org. Rep. and ask him/her to address it officially with the Council. You're a scouter and you're frustrated by a parent Get used to it! Consider whether a different scouter in your unit might be better at dealing with this particular problem case. Make an appointment to meet with the parent at a time and place of your choosing for a frank conversation about expectations. If the problem persists and affects too much of your time or the program for other boys, approach the committee to suspend or remove the family. If the parent has behaved poorly to other people's children, work with your CC and COR and inform them they are no longer welcome at unit events. You're a parent and yeh don't care for the behavior of another parent. Get used to it! We can't all be as good a parent as you. Give each family its space. If yeh really feel the person's behavior is seriously compromising the program for other boys, pull the parent aside and offer your perspective respectfully. Give 'em some time and space to think about it and make changes. If that doesn't work and yeh really feel the person is jeopardizing the program for other kids, make an appointment with the Scoutmaster to discuss your concerns. Give the Scoutmaster lots of time and the benefit of the doubt as he/she tries to work on the situation. If you are tempted to call National, the District Executive / Scout Executive, etc. over a complaint about your son's scouting experience... Don't. It is not effective and will at best be a waste of your time as that's not their role (except as described above). These people are businessmen "hired" by your unit with responsibilities for coordinating resources. Nothing more (or less). They aren't supervisors of your troop, they aren't investigators of complaints, they aren't trained child social workers. Beavah
  19. Yah, as da article indicates, the objections aren't about contraception, eh? They're about religious freedom. And they're not just about conservative hierarchies, they're about progressive reformers objecting as well. Remember, the regulation also provides mandatory coverage for sterilization. We've never seen the government get carried away with mandatory sterilization in the past, have we? We've never seen other nations governments get carried away with mandatory contraception either, I'm sure. If yeh can mandate Catholics cover contraception, then yeh can mandate that Quaker youth groups host military recruiters, that Lutheran Hospitals offer abortions. Yeh can conceive of a time when yeh can mandate euthanasia rather than incurring higher Medicare costs. And while yeh can argue people can opt-out by self-paying, we all know that such an opt-out option applies only to the well-off. It would not be accessible to the poor or to the charities that work with 'em. B
  20. I'm constantly amazed at the liberals who find the 2012 Republican race so amusing A might sensitive aren't we? I reckon the ability to laugh at ourselves is a sign of higher intelligence and good grace. Nobody said conservatives have to be dry, humorless prudes. Maybe that's a modern conservative / Dick Cheney / religious right thing. Sort of like no dancing. I will admit that liberals viewpoints are funnier, though! B
  21. For anybody who is still followin' this thread, here's a piece that I found quite sound in its reasoning, despite comin' from a liberal perspective. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/02/the-contraception-coverage-debate-isnt-just-about-the-bishops/252780/ B
  22. Yah, I'd be in perfect agreement with CalicoPenn, jblake, and TwoCubDad. Especially TwoCubDad's bit about how lookin' at the routine maintenance thing as a way to shoot down a boy's project is exactly the wrong way to go. Yeh use that as a starting point to help him develop a better project. I'd put many painting projects more in the capital repair/depreciation category than the routine maintenance category. Not all painting projects, but many. So it should not be excluded automatically, it should be supported and built on. B
  23. Personally, I'd like to see transition in December Oi! Silly Texans! Around these parts we try to cross 'em over as late into the spring as we can, because brand new 10 year old 5th graders just aren't ready to jump right in to the winter camping / early spring cold deluge camping that troops are engaged in. It's just too big a jump for 'em, combining the social transition with a really hard transition to camping, usually before they've acquired any real outdoors gear. Gotta agree with OneHour, though. The Webelos II program tends to be weak, which means the den leaders have to do a lot more creative work on their own to make things fun and challengin'. Beavah
  24. Yah, hmmmm.... I reckon by your approach that you are the hypothetical parent of one of these hypothetical lads? Yeh pulled a bunch of quotes from different places and mushed 'em all together, but yeh need to understand they're talkin' about very different things. Emotional abuse by a parent or guardian is indeed a crime in most states, and the BSA does indeed encourage scouters to report to the proper child services agency when they have reasonable suspicion that a parent/guardian is emotionally abusing their child. That is not the same thing as bullying, which is generally thought of as a youth-on-youth form of harassment, and which is not a criminal activity in most jurisdictions. We try to protect lads from bullying within scouting by respondin' constructively. Child abuse is a crime in all states, but it's defined differently in each state. In most states, it's again a matter of physical abuse by a parent or guardian, not to be confused with sexual battery or other sorts of crimes that may be perpetrated by others against kids. Yep, we're against all of 'em, and we teach scouters to report suspicions of child abuse to the appropriate child protection services and evidence of other crimes to the appropriate law enforcement agency. For the latter, if they occurred within scouting, then also to notify the SE. None of that of course has anything to do with da hypothetical you posed, eh? So no, the BSA does not recognize bullying as child abuse. I don't think anybody does, at least outside of special interest lobbies makin' emotional cases. No, the BSA itself doesn't really have procedures in place to correct bullying, but they do try to help units through training and whatnot. And no, even if a private organization like the BSA had internal procedures about something, that doesn't make 'em "legally bound" to do anything. Any more than your family rule about bedtime "legally binds" yeh to enforce it on SuperBowl Sunday. Take a step back, Taserdoc. Right now you're runnin' emotionally hot and that means you're not thinkin' as clearly as yeh might otherwise. Support your kid not by tryin' to go after other folks, but by bein' there for him. Let him be the one goin' off about how unfair the situation is. Just be there with love and da mature sense that this too shall pass. Hypothetically. Beavah
  25. Yah, Ron Paul winning Maine would be a hoot. I have to admit, this Republican race is nuthin' if not entertaining, as the anybody-but-that-Mormon crowd runs from one candidate to the next every 6 weeks. Followed by the Romney SuperPAC spending another $10 million plus on new attack ads in a sort of ongoing public game of whack-a-mole. About the only thing that could up the entertainment value is to have President Obama come out and say that he has a lot of respect for Governor Romney, who he embraces as a fellow moderate. Wouldn't that be a stitch? Beavah
×
×
  • Create New...