The Blancmange

See, among other threads, this one: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=300580&p=1 for an extensive discussion of this issue.

So, how about that snow?

I have seen other forums that lock topics which have had no posts for say, 30 or 60 days. This seems to prevent the confusion caused when someone resurrects a thread that is a year or more old. People can still search and view the old topics, and in the rare occasion that a late update is warranted, you can start a new thread. I don't know if this software supports that function, but it seems like a good idea.

Unfortunately, all of the issues you mention have been experienced by other units. Scroll down through the older posts in the Cub Scout forum and you will see more threads. My biggest pet peeve is the Tiger Cub who comes in with the flawlesss, picture perfect car where you know that boy probably just sat there and watched while Dad made the whole thing (if he even got to watch). There are solutions, as far as the rules go, for most issues, but I haven't figured out how to discourage this one. Whatever rules you adopt, make sure you publicize them early and stick to your guns when people complain. It will end up being much more fun for the kids as a whole.

What if you just showed them the workbook? That certainly specifies the level of planning and leadership that are required of the scout. Just looking at one, perhaps even a completed one from a scout who would be willing to share his, it should be clear that the scout should be much more than a source of labor.

I can't understand why a Council would want to add to National's categories under that last catch-all. Why would a council require plans, for example, any time a unit does something away from its regular meeting place, despite the fact that National does not think that is necessary? It appears that a fair amount of thought went into the categories provided by National, where there is, to some degree, a greater risk of something going wrong. Why would a council want to create more work for its staff? Does such a council's leadership really distrust its volunteers so much that it believes, absent their sage supervision, people would send Scouts riding around with unlicensed, uninsured drivers? I just can't see what a council hopes to accomplish by micromanaging, for example, a Pack's trip to a bowling alley a couple miles from home.(This message has been edited by The blancmange)

A few weeks ago, I posed a question looking for examples of situations in which the BSA denied liability coverage: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=302725#id_302725 Not a single example was mentioned. National isn't going around denying coverage, and they certainly wouldn't do it in your hypothetical where, as Beavah points out, deviating from the plan would be the prudent thing to do. Tell this person you're interested in learning more about the issue and would like a copy of the language from the insurance policy that backs this threat. I suspect you'll be waiting for quite a while.

I was told if we swiched days we would not be covered by Scout insurance. You should ask this person why they choose not to follow the Scout Law. This is simply a lie.

Well, since no one really got the opportunity to speak with them...there is no way of knowing for sure. No one has their phone number? No one sees the Scout in school?

>>>>>Judging by a few of the replies I've received, it appears that I will have to accept that my opinions on Crew/Troop interactions are aberrant, if not downright blasphemous. Maybe Fox76 just needs to articulate his concerns more. At this point, the only substantive issue with this Crew's paricipation that was mentioned was that some of them had a potty mouth. That certainly is something that should be addressed, but it has nothing do to with the fact that it was a Crew rather than a Troop. Several people have asked whether the Scouts shared these concerns or had fun. This question has not been answered. Perhaps the OP would get responses that were not viewed as dismissive if he voiced some some basis for his objections. This was a high-school aged crew, so the age alone really isn't a valid issue. (This message has been edited by The blancmange)

Wisdom? Please, elaborate. You know, Different = Wrong

On the cover of the application that he filled out, in fairly prominent terms, is the Scout Oath ". . . my duty to God and my country . . . " In the text on the inside, the Declaration of Religious Principles is excerpted. I agree though, someone should talk to him and find out the nature of their objection - to a particular prayer, or to religion in general, or some other issue?

I liked the guy from the NFC title game myself It was Jim Cornelison, who regularly sings it at Chicago Blackhawk games. The Hawks have a great tradition where the crowd cheers throughout the song, concluding in a deafening roar by the end. This has been both criticized as disrespectful and praised. I remember when they had the NHL all-star game in Chicago during the Persian Gulf War. They interviewed Gen Schwarkpf (I believe), who praised it, thinking the crowd did it because it was being televised to the troops. Wayne Messmer, who sang the anthem at the time, said something to the effect that he didn't have the heart to tell him that's how we do it every game.

Let me guess, they won? How did the Scouts feel about the situation? Did everyone have fun? I guess I don't see it as a problem. Unless you're talking about a crew that is all college aged and used to advanced high adventure like climbing, it really isn't much different from an age-based patrol of older scouts.

USSSP had a similar announcement on its Facebook wall.

Buddhism (as I posted earlier) is a settled matter: It's a faith community. Scouting recognizes it. Exccept the main beliefs of Buddhism (or at least my rudiamentary understanding of them) are inconsistent with the DRP (to the extent the DRP requires belief in capital "G" God). Inconsistencies from Irving? Who'da thunk it?

I've thought about stepping down about as long as it takes me to remember that the CSE and Commish. Tico are shaped just like me. Interesting. So a meeting of the National Key 3 must not fall within the scope of "all other events." Quite an elusive definition.

I smell troll.

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I just came across this article that fits nicely with the earlier part of this discussion: http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/social_security_in_the_heartla_1.php I particularly like the quote from Mr. Dobbs in the last paragraph: I did not choose to be disabled, Dobbs said. I didnt want the stigma of being disabled. As for privatizing any part of the system, he said: I worked for an insurance company. They fired 10 percent of the twenty-five- and thirty-year people so their stock would go up. If you privatized it, those are the bastards who would run it.

There are numerous threads discussing this group and the memorandum. Use the search function and "AHG."

A 5'6" 215 lb adult or Scout should not partake in backpacking in a BSA event - period. Be careful with absolutes. I doubt Maurice Drew-Jones would have too much trouble on a backpacking trip. (Although he's listed at 5'7" and 210#, all of his college stats show him as 5'6." Doubtful that he grew an inch after graduating college). For anyone other than an elite athlete, you're probably right. I'm 6' and dropped from 245 to 230 (incidentally just under the BSA limit), and there is a noticable difference in what I am able to do without getting winded.

And in case my anecdotal observations aren't credible, someone actually took the time to research this: fifty-eight percent of respondents indicate they do not have renters insurance . . . . Forty percent of survey respondents state that cost is the prohibiting factor behind the decision not to purchase renters insurance. http://www.apartments.com/PressRoom/renters_insurance.htm

CalicoPenn wrote: And what "demographic" is that? I saw nothing in Moosetracker's post suggesting that this lad was in any particular demographic than "fellow human". A single parent in a rental apartment. Those facts are easy to glean from the original post. CalicoPenn just needs to read a little further. In my experience, which is far more than just superficial, many times people in that circumstance don't have money for things other than basic necessities. There is nothing improper or offensive about my observation.

I think it would be great to get the scouts involved in helping out, as far as making people aware of the situation and collecting donations. I hate to stereotype, but given the demographic, there is a pretty good chance the family did not have renter's insurance. Who is your CO? A church? Maybe someone can discretely find out what their needs are. Maybe see if the Red Cross has someone assigned to them and ask that person. Gift cards for restaurants might be a good idea. Eating every meal out can get expensive, even if they had insurance.

That's why the paranoia on da forums about insurance and liability is just so hard to fathom. Relax. I wonder why this is? The reason I posted this question was to make this point. It seemed to me that if there were instances of scouters being left high & dry by the BSA, someone would have heard of it. The likelihood of someone being injured at a scouting function is fairly low; the likelihood of you being sued for it is even lower; and the chances of it costing you something out of your pocket are virtually nil. Compare that to something most of us (well, except for maybe the older ones ;-) ) do alost every day: drive a motor vehicle. There is a fair chance that, at some point, many of us will be involved in a collision where someone is injured. Should that happen there is a fair chance someone will claim the collision was your fault to some degree, and a smaller, yet significant chance that you would be sued. Do you alter your driving habits or drive less because of this? I certainly don't. I obey the speed limit (mostly), regularly check my tires and brakes, and make sure I am awake enough to drive not to avoid a lawsuit, but for my safety and that of my family. Basically because it is the right thing to do. I purchase liability insurance not just because the law requires it, but because if I mess up an injure someone, I want them to be made whole. Why should my decisions as a scouter be guided any differently?