skeptic

Simply ANY acknowledgement that this whole witch hunt pales in comparison to the issues in our Government agencies and connected support groups who "supposedly" are paid to protect children. I am simply looking to see actual balance in responses to these tragedies. But, it seems to me, a novice, that few will make the effort to "fix" these shortcomings in Government agencies. Why? Lawyers do not feel they can win? It is cheaper to attack non-governmental groups? The Government and related groups have the aura of being official, so they cannot be held to the grindstone? I do not know. But the imbalance is distressing, and it often appears that our legal system is weighted against actual fairness when it comes to public awareness of their improprieties (to be kind). I am NOT defending the errors in BSA responses, though do feel we continue to ignore that it often was not just the BSA that looked the other way. Families, policing agencies, political powers all played a part. Yet, only the BSA is being held up as the ogre. Am old enough to understand that there is no answer and that the BSA too is a victim in a way. Life is not perfect, and people are surely not, at least not mere mortals. In the end, NOONE will win, except perhaps some lawyers, though maybe the actions of the worst of them may draw sanction (we can hope). But, many will lose, including the actual victims, as has already seemed obvious by a few posters who suggest their hell has been re exposed. Meanwhile, back in the real world I have to get boots repaired so I can try to do a hike Saturday, and our "local" programs try to simply work the program and still offer the actual benefits of Scouting that is still there amidst the turmoil.

While surely most reading this thread would agree that any abuse is too much abuse, we still cannot completely stop it, as it is and always has been a negative side of some human personalities. As noted above, and many times in this tragedy, perfection in defending is not possible. Let's perhaps have some of the better stat finders do some serious comparisons to the National Child Protective Services in this regard. Even a cursory Google search will turn up some truly scary stats. But, because it is part of the Government, it is not held to the same rabid public shame and calls for recompense. The reports from some of the Foster systems are horror stories. So, I have to ask if those reports are even remotely true, where IS that public outcry and the lawyers at the bars? Are the failures of Child Welfare agencies less repugnant than those of youth serving agencies such as the Scouts or the Boys and Girls Clubs, or the Y and so on? As has been repeated over and over again, the failures within the BSA are fewer by percentage than in most similar groups, and certainly far less than those within the Government agencies sworn to protect the children. And they actually have and continue to try to put real and workable barriers in place. But, some do not take them seriously, or simply are too "busy" or "trusting" to take notice. So, I am curious as to what the loudest on here may have to say in this regard. Again, no abuse is acceptable, but should not the responses be similar? Can anyone give a rational and balanced response?

Here again, from Troop 111 in Ventura, California is an apex of Scouting. Thanks to Craig Carey, ASM and his dedicated parents, and thoroughly enthusiastic Scouts. Locally, Scouting is showing its best face, and other units are sharing at times. This is what dedicated leaders can make happen with patience and imagination. And it is not just the trail work, exceptional at any level for novices, but also many other areas of service in our area. Take a look. Many of you reading this might find it a possible option for your own area with a little searching. https://issuu.com/ojaivisitorsguide/docs/ojai_magazine_summer_2021/s/12852782?fbclid=IwAR2ezx1925qPBtzaGeywXcE7N6Wabra4QsWDvraCoP4arf9i-XNE2_sCWec

I came back last Saturday from our camp. All staff had to be vaccinated. All adult leaders had to be vaccinated. Eligible youth were asked to be vaccinated. We had to have proof of the vaccination as part of the paperwork. Precamp troop checks were done with a BSA designed check list. On the day we left, we again went through the checklist and had temps taken. On arrival, we were interviewed and had temps taken. At every meal we had to sanitize in front of a staff person and have temp taken. All group activity required masks, and they enforced it firmly, but nicely, even with this grouchy old man who kept forgetting to put the mask up after water drinking and so on. Areas were regularly wiped down, and dining was outside in tents or open air with little dining hall access except staff and leaders on occasion. Drinks were on a porch, and pitchers had to be filled for meals by staff and given to servers. California state protocols were all were followed strictly, and we had no COVID issues, though a couple of other problems standard to camp attendance. Still, not sure that common sense and simple normal cleanliness and awareness would not suffice for much of it. But of course, Common Sense is dead.

Just the old guy response. I have a number of Mentor pins on the pocket flap of my primary uniform under the knots. Why? Because young person honored me with them, and I seems right to wear them. I know one local that for whatever reason has a dozen or more. He has a pocket device he made to hang from the right pocket nd keeps them on there. Most are only worn at formal troop events, though my pins simply stay there except when the shirt goes to be cleaned.. Uniform police can be ignored. It is your decision, and if they have purpose, or mean something, that is the only thing that matters. So, there. And harrumph!🤗

It happened decades ago now in the old Great Western Council. A COR got miffed and spent a great amount of time gathering other COR's to attend in force. They summarily booted the Executive and his assistant. But it took him a long time to gather the troops, so to speak, and the mess had been brewing for a while. I would need to check the state laws regarding banning voting members from the inner sanctum, so to speak. Not sure that is legal, though it may be as long as a decision requiring a vote is not made without all voting members notified. It is also mostly true that the CO seldom seems to care beyond his own group.

Here is the applicable wording from the BSA directly. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/511-421(16)_WEB.pdf Note this specific statement: "In territory supervised by local councils, each chartered organization shall appoint a volunteer, other than the unit leader or assistant unit leader, as its chartered organization representative to represent it as a member of the district committee and as a voting member of the local council.” The following official description of a chartered organization representative is found in the Rules and Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America. Article VI., Local Councils, Section 3, Chartered Organization Representative, Clause 7. It reads: “In territory supervised by local councils, each chartered organization shall appoint a volunteer, other than the unit leader or assistant unit leader, as its chartered organization representative to represent it as a member of the district committee and as a voting member of the local council.” Following are additional requirements for service as a chartered organization representative: 1. The chartered organization representative’s primary responsibilities are to help units to be successful and to provide coordination between the chartered organization and Scouting. 2. The chartered organization representative is automatically a voting member of the council and the district upon selection or appointment by the chartered organization. The individual must be an adult, a U.S. citizen, and a registered member of the BSA during the period of time that the chartered organization designates this person as chartered organization representative. 3. The chartered organization representative is encouraged to become an active, participating member of one of the district’s committees.

I would hope not, but much depends on the next few months. There was a schism in the church recently, and there likely is also a difference in those views more locally. Our own congregation and pastors are strongly behind us, but they are still tied to the Conference decisions. Hopefully that will be easier by year end. Almost all the troops over 40 years old in our council are Methodists, and ours is 100 in December. The big thing is to NOT be chicken little every time someone says something that may suggest a change in view. At least in my experience, more rational voices rise to the top, and review and adjustments move it all forward. Scouting is still local.

For some direct and less paranoiac info from the main Methodist group. https://www.facebook.com/MethodistScouting/posts/576502677088897?notif_id=1626798180694932&notif_t=page_followed_contents_awareness&ref=notif I spoke with our local minister yesterday, and we are in So Cal, the heart of the liberal church, and she assured me that Methodists in most of the country are not pushing to throw us out. But, she also said that there is a smaller segment, mostly in what we might call Red states, that make that noise. Anyway, read the link above.

This is old news, though glad to see it is progressing. Please try to keep the time frames clear, as I thought while I was at camp I missed something tragic again. Thanks.

You do realize that the COR has had the right to sit on the Executive board for decades do you not? Just because few do, it has been in place a long time and on rare occasion has resulted in dismissal of a Council executive and major changes. But, since few ever pay any attention, too many boards run amuck with power people who want recognition or to do things "their way" and to "their" benefit. Going clear back to the original Dale quagmire, IF this had been done, it would have been left in the lap of the CO to make the decision. But, somehow, those erudite "forward thinkers" decided it should become a public drama and political football. The CO and the actual unit never had an issue with Mr. Dale, even after his trip into college politics and personal reflection. He did not make the initial choice to become public with his personal life, it was forced by some idiot (yes, I know a strong or maybe insulting word) who saw his name in regard to the political football of the time and felt obligated to make it a big deal. Even then, if National had simply put it back to the unit and CO, it might have played out far differently.

There is nothing obvious on the net regarding this, and with the media attitude towards BSA, that is surprising to say the least. Perhaps this can be actually verified?

Yesterday, trying to clean up "stuff" I found a group of printed out opinion pieces from around the BSA's centennial year. Hard copies of various writers and public figures, as well as just old timers and silent, distanced supporters. One of them is the shared explanation of Terry as to why he has chosen his particular course in relation to BSA. It reminded me as to why I originally chose to join the group, and also that we all have our own views and ways of support and ways to change our compasses in relation to Scouting. Perhaps this might be reshared? I can scan it, but it would be easier and maybe even allow a current comment from Terry?

Ventura County Council. It was the first official camp after our founding in June, 2021, opening in 1923. We lost it during the Depression to a project to put U.S. 399 over the mountains from Ventura to the Bakersfield area. Most of what was then 399 stopped at the base of the mountains on the Bakerfield side. Anyway, an agreement was reached for the camp property, including guaranteed lease for property in the Lockwood Valley area near Mount Pinos and Frazier Park. The Lees who had a turkey ranch in Lockwood gave a small plot of land to the scouts, and leases were developed up canyon from there for what is today's camp, Three Falls, with some other additions over the years.

We had one in Camp Gray, our first camp in the twenties, and he continued for a time to the second camp, 3-Falls, still in use, in the thirties. the kids and staff loved him, and he was duly missed when he decided to chuck it in. I think he may have been an army Army or Navy cook at one time.

(deleted) No more comments, though maybe see if any actual new info shows up with actual solutions that are balanced. To answer your other rude question, at least twice we turned someone in for possible abuse, and investigations were done. It was not sexual abuse though. We also contacted one family in regard to a teen scout that was abusing another youth. The parents refused to accept, but the authorities were told in regard to his being in public schools. We did our due diligence if we had information, but we cannot make authorities follow up, and too often, as in some of these cases has shown, it was not just the BSA that dropped the ball. But government is protected it seems and are let off the hook. I hope they come to a fair and rational outcome, and it includes little or no compensation for certain legal people.

(deleted) Sorry, but I am simply tired of the BS of somehow thinking money can cure everything. (deleted). Just my opinion, and I understand you suffered considerable based on what you have shred. Not to be crude, but if someone said here is a billion dollars, now leave it alone, would that somehow cure you? I doubt it, but you, and others with similar stories would have simply had a hand in causing harm to others through the unfeeling system of vengeance. Again, just my perspective, and it applies not just to this unfortunate case. Vengeance at the expense of others who had no hand in the original crime is wrong, almost as wrong as the original crimes. Good luck, but enough with the denial that somehow it is okay to destroy BSA (deleted). None of you will ever be healed, and I have no real solution, other than trying to make the systems work to protect others going forward and bringing predators to justice when the actual perpetrators are still around to be punished. Again, just the way it seems to me.

"The official victims committee, which is known as the tort claimants committee and is charged with acting as a fiduciary for all abuse victims, estimates the value of some 82,500 sexual abuse claims at about $103 billion." For some reason, this statement really annoys me. "The Value?"

I keep seeing individuals comment that BSA has to somehow guarantee this can never happen again. That is not a likely possibility, as we live in the real world of humans, and they are prone to a wide range of less than positive actions and ideas. There can never be an absolute, but the barriers and safeguards can be put in place and closer awareness should become a regular part of our program, both as adults and youth. We have just had a local case in a private school that is held in high esteem. Now, there is an investigation and digging from the past. It never goes away, because perversions are a reality of the human race.

Okay, what am I missing in regard to the Biden connection? Did they file some kind of legal involvement? I looked at the partners on the link given, and currently are no BSA groups that I saw, though I may have missed something. Also did not see anything related to Scouting in general, or for that matter hardly any major youth serving group.

One, is you Cynical. You have suggested that somehow BSA did not do enough to stop this from happening. Reality is that no matter what BSA did or does, it will never be able to stop abuse entirely, other than simply not have a program or interaction with youth of any kind. Society, in the past, and still, looks the other way much of the time. Why, because it is part of the seamier side of the human animal and the cultures in which we live. You expect BSA, or The Catholic Church, or someone to guarantee that none of these terrible things can or will ever happen. That is not possible, and surely you know that. BSA is just the current easy target, and the "vultures" are already peering through their beady eyes at the other youth groups, once they finish with BSA. And as someone else pointed out in the reparation comparison, you cannot change what happened in the past, nor can you legitimately hold the country, or the corporation, or the church accountable for things today in which they had no say or little or no influence. The larger issue is rally this idea that somehow, by ruining someone or some corporation, or some church, or some group of mostly civic minded people for the black sheep that slipped in we make someone or society whole. Not reality, nor is it ever going to fix it all. A reasonable system that deals fairly and within rational limits deters the worst perpetrators and encourages better vigilance. Perfection is impossible, and absolute deterrence of evil is also impossible in societies as we know them. JMO of course. But, please stop suggesting that I, or others with a bit more rational view do not care about the victims. We simply do not feel that making current youth victims in a different manner is fixing the problem. And, T & N, nor any of the other victims will ever be whole, no matter how much they may end up, after the vultures take theirs. One could ask where the saving and making whole of the lost souls of the porn industry is, especially those that prey on the youngest off the streets and so on. What is being done about hose ruined lives? I suspect that there are plenty of possible targets to blame and hold responsible, but they are backed by big power and dark money, and few will even consider taking that on. What about the perpetrators of suggestive advertising aimed at the young? We know pretty much who is responsible, but little is done to enforce those laws. So now, I will attempt to simply watch from the sidelines as this no win argument ( it is no longer a discussion for the most part).

This whole back and forth is futile, as we have a few that simply want the BSA Corporate to somehow take total responsibility for a societal sickness for which nobody has a cure, and likely never will beyond simply no interaction between adults and children. The reality that BSA often was acting at the time on the direction of outside authorities, and also families that chose to not chance the victim being publicly visible due to the legal circus, as well as misdirected fear of embarrassment. Yes, in some instances it appears, though we often do not know for sure why, that someone in BSA may or did choose to not follow up properly. But, in many cases they were apparently put off by local authorities and family decisions. The actual victim then was left in the lurch to deal with their trauma with little or no help at the time, and later with emotional adult problems. It seems to me that the only fair thing then, since in the larger sense it is a failure of human nature and society, then we should have a tax on everyone to defray the emotional costs of therapy and so on, since reality is that society is primarily at fault, even more so than the corporate BSA, right behind the actual predators. And that is where the reparations comparison falls. Some how, society, in a different era, failed people, whether youth, slaves, or races, allowing obvious or at least noticeable emotional and physical damage to occur. And, no amount of retroactive compensation for that damage will ever actually make those victims whole, nor will it stop similar aberrations in the future. Mankind is really not necessarily particularly kind, and there are always going to be those that try to take advantage in some way or another, no matter how many barriers are in place. When the rules are not followed, or someone gets a pass because of connections or money, penalties should be harsh, but not ruinous. Just a view that some here will never feel to be reasonable or even rational. Most on here are not against some type of compensation and aid to victims, but they do not want it at the expense of the overall positive elements of the program or the opportunities for youth. In the end, a few will NEVER be happy with the outcome.

Okay, while I still feel that the tenor of the discussion from Cynical Scouter is not just cynical, but often vicious. That is me though. I might have a different opinion if I were to discuss with him directly. I saw a sea change in the direction of National by NOT putting a professional into the Chief position. I think that wherever possible, the volunteers should be more visible and have more sway. On the other hand, I admit to having had a very poor interaction with some National level volunteers in 2010, gentlemen from the OA. I had approached them in regard to my view on alternate adult requirements that allowed dedicated men who put their "whole" family first, but were key to their units, especially the outdoor program, but did not have the flexibility to spend a week in summer camp without shortchanging their whole family due to limited vacation time. That opinion was based on a fine ASM who was thoroughly trained, including all the outdoor courses, including backpacking training with first aid. He was the lead for over three years on many weekend and 3 day outings, but he had two younger daughter and only limited vacation. So, he chose to spend that vacation with his whole family. I put him up for adult membership when his son became eligible. I wrote the reason why I felt they should induct him, making the point of his pushing 40 days and nights of camping and backpacking with the troop, and his advanced training, including Trail Boss and the noted first aid. I suggested that the intent of membeship for adults was their demonstration of support of the outdoor program, which he did in spades. I had seen men inducted with only one or two summer camp experiences and almost no weekend or short term camping and hiking. To me, he was far a far better example. Oh, I should note that twice, before this, he had gone to camp with his personal tools and done needed repairs, as he was a welder and steel worker. Anyway, the portly high level OA men with whom I spoke talked me down and basically belittled the idea and said there could be no exceptions, period. Well, that of course is not true in and of itself. The ":Chief of the Fire", the council Executive, has the option to override that requirement, though ours at the time would not, refusing to even consider it. So, his son was elected, but his dad could not go through the ordeal with him. The man finally worked out his schedule, with his wife's help, as well as earing more vacation time for longevity, and then he was accepted. But that was almost three years later, and it left a very bad taste in his mouth and all of my unit adults, and even the youth that understood what happened. And I have had to deal with a number of really bad district executives and at least two very poor Council exec's. Thus, the skeptic part tag. So, I will try to overlook my annoyance at the tone, and accept that most on this forum still are for the BSA's survival and finding a better path. Please accept my apology for perhaps being a bit too judgemental. Thanks for the time.

" My memory is that J. P. Morgan provided that money and that the BSA is paying it off. Until you can provide other factual information, I see no reason to not believe the BSA. " Surely, most that still follow this whole heavily skewed discussion understand that NOTHING that reflects anywhere positively on the BSA side will be believed or accepted by Cynical. Yes, I purposely leave the second part of his tag off, as I cannot fathom him actually being a Scouter, and he shows no connections in his profile. He may be, but he long ago appears to have lost the very basic precepts, based on his ongoing vendetta on here. I could be wrong, and just not understand; but that is the impression I get. I do though thank him for the difficult to find info he furnishes, even if it is always presented in a negative manner. Other than the legal things he and T & N share, I personally feel this whole thread has pretty much become their field to plow. At least T & N shares his reasoning and seems to want a survival in some manner. JMO of course.

Trying to get some clarity. First, now the number pending is under 1000; is that just stuff to be added, or did they do some major editing? On the docs included, most of the cases seem to be in New York, Arizona, Hawaii, and scattered otherwise. On the lists of debtors, I do not understand how it could/would include the Catholic Church AND LDS in the same claim. Is it standard legal practices to use this terminology; "Does 1-5 whose identities are unknown to Plaintiff" That would seem they are saying we really do not know, so lets just put some empty spots to add people to later.