OldGreyEagle

We could always turn to the potato gun miscreants in California for technical advice.

Ed, help me out here, again one of your posts confused me. You addressed Merlyn in your last post, first you aked him to give it a rest and then you encouraged him to keep trying, which is it? For him to stop or continue?

I think there may be a diference in compresed gas and compresed air On the other hand, accelerants aside, why not fashion a Catapault/trebuchet and chuck pumpkins, that I know you can do, leastwise I have seen done.

Gee Backpacker, I don't know if internet threads have atatues of limitations, but you do realize BobWhites posts are a year old today, right? Bobwhite hasnt posted since he was asked to take a months rest. Now, if you take issue with what he posted, I don't know why it took you a year to formulate a response, but its your right to disagree. I know at our Councils last big event, Paintball target shooting was all the rage, so scouts can target shoot with paintball guns.

Have it MP3 capable and receive podcasts and most kids will come up with 500 for it

No GB, they dont contradict each other. The G2SS says you need 2 deep leadership excepting patrol activities from that requirement. They support each other

Ok, I know Troops can't add requirements, but how about we consider this. Reading the thread in the camping section about whether or not patrols can have activities/campouts without adults (they can!) I thought of this. Not only can patrols have no adult campouts, it might be a good idea to make leading such an endeavor a requirement for Eagle. The scout plans and leads at least a minimum number of scouts on an overnight of at least 24 hours, drop off at noon, pick up at noon the nest day. The Eagle candidate plans and leads the whole thing, whatta U think?

To add to anarchists excellent post and points, I have from the Scoutmaster's Handbook, Chapter 4, Patrol Activities: "Most patrol activities take place within the framework of the troop. However, patrols may also set out on day hikes, service projects, and overnighters independent of the troop and free of adult leadership as long as they follow two rules: * The Scoutmaster approves the patrol activity. * The patrol activity does not interfere with any troop function. A patrol activity without adult supervision should be allowed only when it has been thoroughly planned and the Scoutmaster is satisfied that the activity is well within the patrol members' levels of training and responsibility. If the Scoutmaster has any doubts, he should encourage the patrol to reconsider its plans, or should assign adults to accompany the patrol during the activity in question." I freely admit the above was cut and pasted, well actually, it was scanned, copied and pasted, but I didnt want to retype what the BSA stand is on Patrol Outings without adults. Also, you can go o the BSA website, search for the phrase "patrol activities" and you will find the same information. (This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

I do beleive you are talking about a Patrol Campout and not only does BSA allow them, I think they outright encourage them. The patrol submits a plan to the scoutmaster who can either approve or not approve the plan. If he doesnt approve, he should work with the patrol to get a plan he can accept. I wouldnt look at age or rank, rather at maturity and responsibility level. I think it would help overall troop morale if this happened.

So we need to enforce the laws already on the books rather than force more laws on the books

It is with not just a little trepidation I post this, since I admit it is copied. But its the BSA explanation of what a Board of Review is, or rather what its supposed to be A periodic review of the progress of a Scout is vital in the evaluation of the effectiveness of the Scouting program in the unit. The unit committee can judge how well the Scout being reviewed is benefiting from the program. The unit leader can measure the effectiveness of his or her leadership. The Scout can sense that he is, or is not, advancing properly and can be encouraged to make the most of his Scouting experience. Not only is it important to review those Scouts who have learned and been tested for a rank, but also to review those Scouts who have shown no progress in their advancement over the past few months. The members of the board of review should have the following objectives in mind when they conduct the review: To make sure the Scout has done what he was supposed to do for the rank. To see how good an experience the Scout is having in the unit. To encourage the Scout to progress further. The review is not an examination; the board does not retest the candidate. Rather, the board should attempt to determine the Scout's attitude and his acceptance of Scouting ideals. Scout spirit is defined as living the Scout Oath (Promise) and Scout Law in a Scout's everyday life. The board should make sure that good standards have been met in all phases of the Scout's life. A discussion of the Scout Oath and Scout Law is in keeping with the purpose of the review, to make sure that the candidate recognizes and understands the value of Scouting in his home, unit, school, and community. I post this as a resource to joeleeper so he can see what the official policy is, those who object to cutting and pasting I offer my most humble apology, but I don't see discussing an issue without having the specific BSA wording available

to paraphase the man in black you have to "walk the line". As a scout, my mother didnt quite push me to Eagle, although she did surreptiously mention how nice a mothers Star, Life Eagle scout pin would be for Christmas, Easter, Mothers Day, birthday. As I look at it now, I see it encouragement, as she didnt always get the next pin for the next available holiday, but she did eventually get them all. And I did it because I wanted to, and I wanted to get her the pin. Somewhere between presenting the scout with a schedule to appear when for what requirments and leaving them to their own devices is where we should be. And that may change for each scout. Some scouts have inner motivation, others may need more encouragement. I look forward to others thoughts

There is somehting I have pondered. School shootings, and why it seems they seem to only happen in the suburbs or in rural communities. I don't think its because there are no guns in inner city Detroit or Chicago or in South Central LA or Harlem, NYC. I do think it's because any one drawing a gun in those urban environment can reasonably expect return fire.

Anarchist, I feel the love every time I log on here and I view you as a brother, the one I dont talk to, much Anyway, the point I was going for, and is reflected on many threads is that the requirements for Eagle are supposed to be national standards not breached by local whims. There are not supposed to be Eagle mills and there are not supposed to be super extreme tough troops, there are just supposed to be troops where the Boy Scout program is presented.

"if everybody is thinking alike then nobody is thinking". General George S. Patton, Jr. American Army Officier and Philospher (this one we got covered)

the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few Mr. Spock Noted Vulcan Science Officer and Philosopher

hey now, dont be dissin' the red beret. emb021, I saw a scout wearing a red beret back on his head and puffed out, talk about scary! The red beret is not for everyone, much as not every one can wear the knee socks with panache BTW, the first entry of this thread was posted 11.1.2001, is this a record or what?

yes, scouts is different, no one gets benched in scouting because they just arent good enough

re reading my post, I may have come off as too gruff. Here is a post from a similar topic I am very much against defining Active with some percentage number. Lets say Troop A has a 75% attendance at meetings and 50% of events policy and Troop B has a 50% Meeting and events policy and Troop C has no numerical formula. In Troops A and B scouts routinely drop out and do not advance and look back on their scouting careers and think, boy, I wish I had done more in scouts but with band and baseball (etc) I couldn't fit it in. Then there is Troop C. They have scouts who are active at different times of the year and then arent so active. These scouts advance when they show up and do the requirements. They can look back at their scout career and think, wow, scouts were fun and I was able to do all those other things as well. The added kicker is if any of the scouts of A, B, or C earn Eagle, they earn Eagle. There is no asterisk attached to any of the Eagle Certificates delineating the attendance record of the scout. But, I digress, the question at hand is how to define active. Here is how I look at it. To advance in ranks up to and including first class, certain requirements have to be met. Shopping, Cooking, Camping, attendance at a set amount of troop activities. When the scout accomplishes these requirements, I think you have to say the scout was active; after all, he accomplished all the requirements that were presented to him. Now, when a scout is First Class, things do get interesting, in order to advance he has to complete (make that satisfactory complete) a position of responsibility for at least 4 months. As is normal all the requirements say the scout is to be an active member of the troop, patrol ect, to advance. Now, I dont think a scout can satisfactory complete 4 months in a position of responsibility for 4 months and still not be defined as an active scout. The key is the way the position of responsibility is handled. The scoutmaster or designee goes over the job description with the scout and assures the duties and expectations are understood. On a periodic basis the scoutmaster or designee reviews the scouts performance and highlights strengths and they talk about how to improve weaknesses. When the four months is through, there is no question that the scout was active, he had to be to complete his job. Then the scout becomes Star and a six-month Position of Leadership is required. Again, the job description is reviewed, the expectations set and the monitoring begins. After six months, if the job is done well, the scout had to be active. The Scout is now Life and in another 6 months he could be Eagle, the cycle being followed again. Lets say a scout joins a troop on his 11th birthday. Its a really happening troop and he goes through the ranks and becomes a first class scout on his 12 th birthday. In 4 months he becomes Star and 6 months later Life and indeed 6 months after that, when he is 13 and 4 months old he reaches Eagle. He has satisfactorily completed the requirements. He held three positions of responsibility and always understood the expectations and always met them. He attends 90% of the meetings and 80% of the events. Then after his Eagle Court of Honor, he is never seen again. Well, he is seen, just not as a scout. He completed his requirements and in Irving, he is listed as an Eagle. Then you can have another scout. One of many interests and an eclectic lad by nature. He also joins at 11, and he takes one year to make first class. But then after his 4 months stint as historian, satisfactorily completed, it takes him another 12 months to accomplish the required merit badges for Star. After earning Star he drops out of sight for 6 months and them comes back, assumes the Quartermaster position and goes great for 6 months then when his stint is over, it takes him another 6 months of spotty attendance but he makes Life. Then it takes him 18 months to make Eagle with 6 months of solid ASPL work, but due to band and baseball, little else. It takes the second scout considerably longer to achieve Eagle, but as both met the requirements, in Irving the names are in the same file, under Eagle Scouts. Was the second scout as active as he could have been? No, Was the first scout? No, But if they both met the requirements, and performed them satisfactory, so I would say they were both active.

lets see, what does the requirement read? "Be active in your troop and patrol for at least six months as a Life Scout." I dont see "last six months" anywhere, you have a bunch of adults trying to add their thoughts to the BSA program.

Prairie Scouter, I didnt understand your comment, somehow it seemed off topic . Anyhow, As I recall, the invasion of Iraq was caused by Saddam. Yes, I said Saddam. According to the treaty that ended the first Gulf War, Saddam was to destroy his WMD and allow UN Arms Inspectors to well, inspect arms and oversea the process. Anybody remember how that was working out? The inspectors would show up and be delayed, they were harrassed and thrown out of Iraq a few times, and left on their own a few times and the UN passed resolution after resolution that Iraq has better be good and allow the inspections, or else. Well, heck, the world could see the UN inspectors werent going to find anything, Saddam did what he could to obstruct anything he could. And we watched on TV. We watched as scenes of terrorism unfolded across the globe, then on 9-11, it happened, it wasnt a movie, Bruce Willis couldnt bail us out and thousands died. By now we know either Iraq didnt have the WMD we thought he did, did he ever? I don't know, I thought part of the evidence of the arms was that the US gave him stuff back in the 80s and it hadnt been acounted for, I could be wrong. All Saddam had to do was let the UN Inspectors do their job and nothing would have happened. So, did Bush lie to get us in war with Iraq? I dont know. But I do know, if Bush had done nothing, and on the third anniversary of 9-11 sarin gas was released in the Chicago subway while a dirty nuke went off in San Francisco, and Iraq was implicated, the same people abusing Bush now would have been screaming about how he had all this information that WND existed and he did nothing. Awhile back, before 9-11, I was reading how the fundamental Islamists said the West, especially the US was too soft and corrupt to fight them. That they could rely on us to fold from the inside. On 10-11 I saw the American Flags on cars and houses and was glad, a year later fewer and now, hardly any. The terrorists have patience, they can wait while we destroy ourselves. I remember when the Dixie Chicks apologized for having Bush as a president and it almost cost them their career, now the president is fodder to all many of jokes, how did it change so fast? We have such capacity to wage war, we will have evolved when we wage peace as effectively as we wage war. The problem I see is the war was tactically brilliant, the aftermath a jumbled mess of assumptions and inadequate supplies that leads me to beleive FEMA orchestrated it. We talk about losing credibility, if we walk out of Iraq now why would any country beleive us again? if we walk out now and leave Iraq, we will be back there fighting them, or fighting them here. What we cant forget is the militant Islamics want us all dead. Its not because we have cars, its not our houses, its not our way of life, its because we are not followers of Islam and they will continue to kill as many of us as they can. How do you make peace with people who want you dead?

Help a faulty memory here, what was the role the UN played in all this anyway? I thought they were involved somehow

Then again, what's a more endearing scene, ex-jocks sitting around a table drinking beer and recounting their athletic exploits of 30 years ago or geeks sitting around a roaring campfire assisiting in a campfire program that many of the youth who attend will never forget(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

least we forget Steve Fossett, balloonist and Eagle Scout. I have never heard of some one saving a life and later saying he relied on skills taught in football/basketball/baseball etc practice. And I didnt know spending time helping youth was being geeky, but it does remind me of a song, everybody, to the tune of "Home on the Range" Ode to Scoutleaders Aren't Scoutleaders grand For the programs they plan And the hours they put in each night? If they're ever home You know they're on the phone For the boys who they want to teach right. CHORUS: We're at home in the woods. On weekends with our troops we stay. Thought we never get rest, The boys are doing their best, And that's what we're getting for pay! They hike to their site Though it takes half the night Through the wind and the rain and the snow! These leaders so brave They could live in a cave Except that their wives just say No! Camp food tastes just great, Like an old paper plate, And the bug juice is not fit to drink. So why every year, For a week we come here It's not for vacation, we think! They read magazines With great camping scenes, Frustration does things to their brains. Champagne is taboo, Miller Lite is too, So for forty eight hours they abstain. They feel like old men, On a camp out, they've been To be clean, to be warm, to be dry! But to tell you the truth, they're re living their youth So in answer they merely reply!

yes Ed, you are wrong