skeptic

Not sure your comparison. The OP shared a link about an Eagle with a knife in his emergency kit in his car. Still, point taken as to S.I. and phone.

Especially if Mom and BF are unaware of it. Also depends ofn what defines "making out", as there too are levels there. All a murky and is open to distortion and inuendo. Of course, we also have the lovely accepted so called Reality TV and some pretty questionable stuff, along with even suggestive commercials and ones for "adults". Our culture and society is often "free range" in respect to questionable activities in front of kids and the general public.

The issue is that we are trying to combat the actual real world exposure kids have to way too much questionable activity and the simple youth interchange. Yes, we need to find ways to make it better, but we also cannot stop the exposure completely unless we put them all in those roll around bubbles or something. And nothing will ever completely fix it.

Being a fly on the wall, with a recorder of some kind, in any lunch break area in any school, even elementary, might turn ears blue.

Thanks; that is what I was hinting at, but tend to ramble some. Adolesence brings these discussions up in most youth gatherings at some point. It is the time for trying to figure things out, evaluating personal feelings, and experimenting. In other words, normal bumps and activities of growing up and dealing with emotional and physical changes. Overreaction to these things is possible worse than ignoring. IF you are confronted with it directly or indirectly, the issue is how do you address it without putting the youth into the "pervert" category? Do you bring parents into the discussion? Do you have some sort of broad group interchange with youth and adults? And, of course, they then still go back into the cultural swamp where foul language is accepted as normal, and even advertising is suggestive. Balance and reality is lost with too much knee jerk response, but we still need to somehow try to weed out the actual problems. Just observations from a long life of not only Scouting, but working in schools and on occasion with other youth groups. Then we also have the blinders too many wear when it is "their kid", or their "friend". Catch 22 in much of the drama. So, better awareness, but not over reaction either. The line is pretty narrow.

"I want to nail as many predators to the wall as we can". That I would hope few if any here would have issue with. Trouble is, it does not seem to be the main goal, as of course, most, if even alive, have little to take, other than their freedom.

Can we say McMartin?

Some of you must be really good with knot tying, and even better with splicing with the way you twist things to make yourselves seem the only ones with valid views. And yes, while this is regarding BSA, the issues extend beyond them, and if that is not important to you as well, then you need to step back and reexamine. Your inuendo and often insulting responses is juvenile and very narrow, as well as hints at actual vengence. Please do not embarrass yourselves further.

So, we now have reached the point of thinking somehow we can change the nature of the process of adolescence? Where does the line of demarcation get drawn between centuries old "normal" experimentation in adolescence and abuse? Was my early adolescent discomfort with slow development, due to a glandular disorcer treated as I entered it, abuse when forced to shower with others in HS? Were the older youth who tended to tease and taunt abusive, or just dealing with their own confusion? Will we ever discover a way to walk that irregular line to the satisfaction of all? Meanwhile, we have abundant evidence that many interactions of slightly older mentor youth having huge positive effects on those just entering that scary part of growing. Idolizaion of the big brothers and sisters, or cousins, and even young youth mentors, which is where the youth leadership element plays. How many of us here have seen concrete examples of Joe SPL, or PL mentoring a confused and frightened young scout and then seen that timid boy start to respond and have confidence? That is where the best of Scouting happens, the youth and adult mentoring, and the older youth and younger youth mentoring. I would suggest that the blinders that some are referring to, or the obfuscation of many indications of problems is common to not just BSA, but to our society as a whole. Mission control; "We have a problem". IF whatever shakes out can be inclusive of as much of the youth service/aid groups as possible, then we have accomplished something. But if it does nothing put put money in lawyer's pockets and destroys most critical youth serving groups, does it "fix" anything? We come back to the need for BSA, and ALL youth serving groups, to be constantly vigilant and to put fair, but real teeth into safety of their charges. At the same time, we do not want to think we can solve it completely. That is just a PollyAnna idea, as few psychologists or sociologists will ever completely agree on these issues. As someone already noted, should we expect to also fix the nuclear family and its arms? As most of what I have seen indicates that is where the greatest damage occurs. And similarly, it appears also that there is far more damage in the government systems that supposedly "protect" children. Utopia is shown to be basically impossible. And so is absolute safety of not just children, but people in general, and even property and so on. Meanwhile, as I keep sawing; don't throw out the babies.

I have to wonder; if this individual had the job noted, and he held it into this year, where has he been up to now? When all the stuff hit the fan, was he casualty and lost his job, or did he lose his job due to not being successful with YP? Lots of questions, particularly if this is a sour grapes attack because he got let go?

Actually, he was away at college, and became involved with college activism for Lgbt individuals, being elected to president, I believe of his campus chapter. It made the papers and then the local news in his town. Then it went from there when someone decided he should report him. Meanwhile, the unit was already aware and had not had an issue. It was outside people nosing into it that brought the trouble, and then National moving outside the CO, who had no issue. It was the type of case the activists were waiting for, and the drek hit the fan. But National did not do a good job of fighting it, and it went downhill from there, even though they won the original challenge to decide their own membership. It was then set up for the political activists to blow it completely out of proportion and use the case for their personal gains without caring about the damage they caused Scouting. Women had already been allowed to be regular leaders by then following a push in California. But until that time, few problems had gone public beyond some occasional local situations that were not made a big deal. The issue of abuse though has little to do with the LGBT proponents. Most stats indicate abusers are straight and actually known family or friends, and trusted people; thus scout leaders, teachers, coaches and so on. There will never be a way to completely stop it, but being aware and following the group requirements of no one on one and so on is paramount to mostly stopping it.

Perhaps revise the pullout part of the HB to have specific places for parental and youth initials, not just take their word they covered it? We all know that likely half or more do not really review it, or even look at it. How do we make it more likely to actually have that review?

Again, you are so focused on your own vision of things that you do not look beyond the immediate event. Reality if that Scouting, on the unit and many council levels was moving towards that. But, as too often occurred then, and still does, not just in Scouting, some less than aware people overstepped and made a mess. Mr. Dale's own unit had no issue with him, and so stated. But somebody decided, out side the local council and unit, to make a scene and then National put the stupidity in motion. If, it had been allowed to play out on its own, it would have moved towards the changes. Once outside forces intruded, it was headed to the wreck it became. This of course is an example of top down not having a clue, and often has been subject in various ways of discussions on this forum. Forcing things rarely works out for the best.

Yep; it was my point in the nineties with the Gay issue and others that followed. The wheels were moving in that direction, but some felt the need to stigmatize BSA and others for PC reasons. We would likely have gotten to where we are anyway, but maybe on our own terms and with far less turmoil.

For years my shot/vaccination segment has included circa mid forties childhood vac's, polio date aproximated with cube, had dissease, or the actual dates more recently. Few of us have specific records of childhood shots, especially if born in the middle of the 20th century.

As a tangential discussion, I am reminded of BP trying to put Scouting forward as an international way of reaching other cultures without the often caustic political issues adults too often bring to the table. He used the term "Peace Scouts" on occasion. And we can find many stories from international Scouting events and just occasional meetings from other Scout groups that support the idea. We are often far too centered on BSA and pay little attention, other than at World Jamborees, to other groups. We were fortunate in 1979, while on a trek at Philmont, to run into a full crew of South African scouts. They had come to Philmont in lieu of the cancelled Iranian Jambo. We had a great interchange of Scouting. But what I found most telling was that there were twelve of them, senior scouts who were all white. But their adult leader was Black, and the White youth showed him seemingly absolute respect. This was when Apartheid was still in place. Of course we have also heard the stories, whether true or not we do not know, of foes meeting in the World Wars and discovering Scouting as a shared element, choosing to not become enemies in the moment. But, from my observations over time, I too often have found myself not giving enough credit to youth for things, or allowing them to figure it out. Yet that is a major part of the program. We adults need to not take our youth more seriously and actually "listen"; that is not just hearing, but understanding with interchange if needed.

As often seems to occur, some post poorly supported historical comments, often having little or no understanding of the evolution of the program over time. As someone noted, much of the past history of Scouting is intwined in the larger societal norms of the time and locations. In the case of Blacks, it became an issue for decades, discussed and bounced around at biennial conferences of Exectutives, and at National offices as early as the early 20th century. That the focus was more on the South at the time is to be expected. Yet, in many instances local councils found ways to work with the problem, while struggling to not butt heads too hard with local cultural norms of the time. Meanwhile, we can find historical references of the youth simply being scouts together while adults played the political games. As with most changes in community standards, it is a slow evolution to a place where it is mostly part of the norm. It is unfortunate that we live in a time when some feel the need to somehow change history by dragging things into today from an earlier time, then addressing it with today's standards(?). In occasional movies that play with the idea of time transport we see how some picture such things, and the difficulties it makes when out of the original time segments. Sometimes these movies are just comedic, but some actually attempt to deal with the possible confusions and so on. To me, in this case, though I would suggest the young women should have perhaps not worn uniforms if they planned ahead of time to breach their discussion, they did a great job. That is what learning rights and responsibilities means in the early requirements, and why there are Citizenship requirements that ask them to be involved in some manner. It is often fine line.

Enough to cover your therapy and creat a tangible and stable investment to allow comfort financially without avarice and living above others in moderate middle income families or individuals in the U.S. Added to that, an honest effort by authorities to punish properly the actual perpetrator if still alive, without punishing his descendents unless they could be proven to be involved beyond familial blindness. Monetarily, a half million dollars invested properly will offer a good return indefinitely. Especially if the cost of therapy is not coming out of your pocket or those earnings. I do not even suggest that this would make you whole, as even a billion dollars will not do that. At the same time, unless each of you can find a way to hold others in the larger tragedy of poor judgements or CYA, including possibly family, authorities, and maybe even therapists and octors responsible similarly, then you (not you specifically) might be viewed as vindictive with no peripheral considerations. It will never be "fair", to you, the victims, or to those tangentially affected by others' poor judgements or CYA decisions. Pure vengeance and avarice at the detriment of others not responsible is not anymore "fair" than just ignoring the whole thing. As I noted befoe, "Lady Justice" carrys a scale for a reason.

Must be alot of great brownies available to some posting here. The snide inuendos is not missed by anyone, but that has become the norm with a few now. Not worth even trying to actually having balance and overall fairness with a few. So, since the suggestion is that I do not care about the victims (though I do, but with vetting)I might suggest that some do not care about the youth of today's program. That is surely not the case, but the outlandish settlement figures do not validate that. Have fun with your pointed tongue.

Pure insanity from my perspective. If that is truly their idea of fair and balanced, then they are under the influence. Please do not give me the BS about I do not care or something. This figure is simply so far out there that I am surprised they would share it.

I either need to have new eyes, or I need to change my understanding. The figure shown here is in the trillions, not billions. Now I understand errors happen, but am I reading this wrong, or is that actually somehow their pie in the sky idea?

That one is really important with the chance of metal or splinter injuries. A pine needle under a nail is not fun either. All might result in a tetanus shot.

I just received this through the Methodists FB site. It appears there has been work in the background and they may yet work it all out. https://michiganumc.org/bishop-offers-new-advice-on-scout-charters/?fbclid=IwAR1oUmtjRR5UThWWuFzf1GAIToUFuv6asQ8qwTwW43Mp5L5Z48qXGDh6W44 In the meantime, we are treading water and looking at the Kiwanis, though we would still meet at the church, which they want. With this extension, hopefully we can forego an actual charter org change.

I was led to believe that the early childhood inocculations were forever. I got what was available in the mid to late forties, then the polio when it became available. I had mumps and chicken pocks as a kid in very heavy cases, then oddly got measels twice my last quarter of my freshman year; first the regular "3 day", then just a couple weeks later the German. Missed half the last quarter and messed up my grades royally due to absences. Also was given stuff for plague when I was supposed to go to Peru in the Peace Corps, then got "selected out" and ended up joining the Air Force in 65 and when they had an outbreak of plague in Turkey in 1966 they gave all of us in Europe the plague shots, and I got really ill due to the basically double dose. They would not believe me that I had gotten it less than a year before, and I did not have the proof. But, never got the plague.

Yes, most of the suggested payouts are accurate based on info we have seen. BUT, the main gist of the story is that LC's and others are not putting in as much as they can or should. And that is simply not accurate, other than if they were to liquidate. Of course, that would make Mr. K happy, as we already know. Still, I am properly chastised that I suggest his right to "free speech" should be restrained, and that is not corret. Though his free speech tends to be a lot misleading and maybe even a little fuzzy. He got what he wanted though, so he should be pleased, no matter how misleading much of it is. Just don't expect me, or perhaps others, to not find it to be tainted.