acco40

I think it is really simple - either society is better off with an armed citizenry or it isn't. If it is, why restrict - i.e. churches, schools, etc. If it isn't, why allow?

I guess I have issues with someone serving as a SM or SA who thinks spending a weekend with fellow scouters camping, learning or teaching scout skills "a complete waste of time" serving as a leader to the youth. I've taken, taught and served as SM (i.e. ran) IOLS. Many times there were participants in the course that had mastered a particular skill better than the instructor. Those folks either became a very valuable addition to the staff and helped to train those who were not proficient or acted as petulant "this course is wasting my valuable time" folks who made the course unpleasant for both the staff and participants. Scouting should be fun for the adults and the youth. If one really feels that spending a weekend camping, cooking and practicing or teaching basic scout skills is a waste of their time - maybe they really shouldn't be an SM or SA.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Yes, what Scout doesn't dream of providing security for the port-a-potties?!

While those like me think the AWB was written by those very knowledgeable about guns and knew it didn't have any teeth but would appease the masses. Sort of like the TSA.

BS-87, there is a logical solution to these issues. Let the mother exercise her right to choose abortion but don't quite just yet abort the fetus. Allow a live birth, have the state raise the child up until the time it can really make an informed decision to see if this brown-eyed, math impaired girl will be a burden or an asset to society. Hey, she may be a Beyonc and "keeper." Of course, if she is not, well when they execute her, please do it behind closed doors so as not to upset those of us with weak constitutions for such thing.

Heck, I jumped into the gun issue so what can I lose by discussing abortion? So, I'm sure many will argue but I see the following as facts. First, OGE, abortion is not murder. Murder is a legal term. It is the unlawful taking of a human being with malice aforethought. Currently, since abortion is legal in the United States (most cases) it is therefore not murder. Also, a fetus is not currently universally recognized, by law, as a human being. You may argue that laws should be passed that define a fetus as a human being and making abortion illegal and thus murder, but presently it is not. Of course if abortion were murder, what does one due about a miscarriage? What about a miscarriage due to negligence? What is a pregnant 25 year old drinks a little too much and gets into a car accident and loses the "baby" - would that be manslaughter? Second, Planned Parenthood is the nation's largest single provider of abortions and it also receives millions in federal funding in which to provide other services. That pisses off many so called anti-abortion folks. Forget the fact that the use of federal funds for abortion has been banned for close to 50 years. Those funds does 'free-up" other funds for Planned Parenthood to possibly allocate to abortion (i.e. donations, fees, etc.). Kind of reminds me of government funding of education and the lottery system! Third, many avenues have been tried to manipulate this federal funding to Planned Parenthood tie. The Reagan "gag rule" trying to ban abortion counseling as an option was tried. Repeated attempts to defund the organization have occured. Fourth, Planned Parenthood provides over a million pap smears, 800,00 breast exams, 4 million STD tests and treatments and yes, nearly a quarter of all abortions performed in the United States. For many women, it is the family doctor. Now, opinions. Planned Parenthood seems to me to be one of those "bogeymen" that some use as a rallying cry to garner support for their cause. Yes, I believe there is an extremely small number of women who use abortion as a contraceptive procedure - that is a problem. I really think the vast majority of folks want to minimize abortion. The question is what is the best way to do that? Make it illegal? Provide free contraception? Provide sexual education to our youth? The problem is, their doesn't seem to be a unified approach. What I find sad is that many look at this topic emotionally and not analytically. The same folks who seem to want to outlaw abortion don't want the "Government" (i.e. public schools) to educate our sexually mature youth (capable of having children) about pregnancy and sexual matters. It is a nasty conundrum.

If the religious growth program for my faith has more than one level (for the different grade levels), may I earn all of these levels? Yes. Students can earn all levels of their religious growth series. However, students must be in the appropriate grade when they start each level, and they may not go backwards and earn younger programs.P.R.A.Y. - Protestant church programs. So the purple knot (youth) may be worn on the uniform. As for the medals, for example for the Roman Catholic faith has awards for the Light of Christ (Tiger & Wolf), Parvuli Dei (Bear & Webelos), Ad Altare Dei (Boy Scouts at or above 7th grade). A youth, Cub Scout or Boy Scout, could wear those medals (all or highest) but would wear only one "purple knot." Religious emblems are for all members of the BSA that wish to pursue them. The Youth Awards are earned through work with the individual religious unit and the requirements for each are set by the church and not by BSA. Once earned, the award is generally presented by the church or religious group but may also be recognized by the Scout unit at an event such as a Court of Honor or Troop meeting or Pack meeting. This award may be earned as a youth, or presented to an adult that is nominated. Once earned as a youth, the knot may be displayed on the uniform from that time forward. If a Scout earns the youth award and as an adult later is presented the adult award as well, both knots may be worn. For each faith, a specific set of requirements is published and is established by the religious faith and not by BSA. So an adult may wear two purple knots (they are slightly different - the youth and adult knots).(This message has been edited by acco40)

More proof that humans are irrational. A surge in folks buying up guns thinking that will protect themselves and a refusal to go out and get a flu shot. As Pogo (Walt Kelly) stated, "We have met the enemy and he is us."

Sheesh, Beavah. You take all the emotion out the discussion when you use facts. Shame on you!

My next door neighbor had his gun (.38 handgun) stolen from his house - it was locked up. That makes me nervous. In my job, I deal with 120mm cannister rounds (XM1028) - that makes your sawed-off 12-gauge look like a pea shooter. I don't need to own a gun to feel "manly" or protected. No matter how I choose to arm myself, there is always some other person that will be able to defeat me because I will actually have a split second delay about pulling the trigger before I attempt to take a life - the criminal may not. So where does it stop? Where I live, the violent crime rate is 2,137 per 100,000 residents - We're #1! We're #1! In reality, most homicides are between a known perpetrator and their victim. They are not random acts of violence. However, it is these seeming random acts that get the press. SR540Beaver, I've got news for your, a gun is an inantimate(sic) object in someone's hand or not.(This message has been edited by acco40)

I think the "model patrol" is an excellent way to show the boys by doing - not by lecturing - and that is why I've incorporated it into our troop as well. Besides, I've had SA who were fantastic cooks and the fine culinary experience of eating pancakes from the NSP that used Oreo cookie "shells" as the flour (icing was liked off) is an experience I can live with once and not feel cheated.

I'm not an anglophile so I don't fully understand the relationship between teh royal family and God. I think the "Sovereign" (Queen right now) has to be a member of the Church of England and as the "defender of the faith" promises to maintain the Church. The Queen appoints the church elders (Archbishops and Bishops). These appointees as well as parish priests take an oath of allegiance to the Queen and may not resign without her blessing. So, at least for the UK, I don't think they can really separate Queen and God - each should either stay or go. I will do my best, to love my God, to serve my Queen and my country, to help other people and to keep the Guide law. We don't have a "Church of the United States of America" and we tend to shy away from oaths to Presidents, Senators or Congressmen. I guess the closest we come is when our armed forces personnel promise to "uphold the constitution."

Also, a properly run IOLS follows the The Boy Scout Handbook very closely. As far as I know, there is no mention of electric heaters or Wood Badge critters in the The Boy Scout Handbook. Kudu and others - courses like these usually struggle for volunteers to run them. I suggest you volunteer and help run these courses the way they should be run. Push your councils and districts to get as a minimum 20 to 30% new staff for every course. This will prevent folks from just going through the motions or from creating an "old boys network" of sorts.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Okay, I think the vast majority of the posters on this thread miss the point of the Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills course. Yes, it does provide leaders with the basic outdoor skills but that is not the real point. So a simple "test out" that shows you know these skills should not be available. If properly run, what the course should give the participant is the experience of being a scout. The skills should be taught just like they are in a troop - hands-on participation and with the buddy system. The buddy system is used - not instead of the patrol method - because it allows the participants to practice the task with enough repetition to learn the skill well and also help (or be helped by) their buddy if needed. Adults, just like some of the youth, have a fear of failure so working with a buddy who supplies positive reinforcement helps reduce the possibility of non-participation or embarrassment that may occur in a large group. So really, it is not the scout skill that is being taught (those skills are really not too hard to master - we expect 11 years-old's to master it for Pete's sake) - what the adults really should be learning by observation is the teaching methods that are used to instruct them.

Yep, prepare chili and allow patrols that do not want to partake to prepare their own menus. Young palates have their preferences. If the meals are nutritious and are not simply heat and serve - why not let the patrols make what they want? The youngsters sometimes simply cook what they know. In our troop, the adults were not enamored with the youths choices for food so we (adults) ate as a patrol and had quite a varied menu. Well, the boys would always seem to saunter over and want what we were making. The SPL and ASPL ate with the adults (for two reasons - not to overshadow the PLs and so I could spend time with them as SM). We were adamant that the other patrols did not eat our food but we were also very amenable to teaching them how to plan and cook what we ate so that if they wished to make food that was fantastic but required a little more effort than boiling water - they could.

It is a simple quandary. Folks with guns can do a lot of harm. One solution is to arm folks to combat the "evil" person. Another solution is to attempt to limit the availability of guns. Neither is a perfect solution. Personally, I don't carry a gun. But then again, I don't feel threatened. I can see the frustration of a homeowner who lives in a crime ridden area wanting to protect himself - especially is they feel the police force is unresponsive. My preference is for the government to regulate guns at least as well as they do automobiles. Require a license to "operate" them, require a written and "driving" test to obtain a license, make the licensing renewable every four years or so, have age and health restrictions, etc.

Seriously, it is a mistake many make - to assume that a person with anti-social behavior somehow had parents who were at fault. Humans are a very strange beast - some are very resilient and come out "normal" even when raised in abhorrent circumstances. Other times, they turn into sociopaths even with loving, nurturing parents.

Maybe we should place an armed guard in every home and have them shoot non-loving nurturing parents?(This message has been edited by acco40)

One of the reasons I became a Scoutmaster was that it "forced" me to spend time with my two boys. Yeah, that is kind of sad but sometimes, I fall in the trap of putting too much emphasis on my "paying" career.

Not a silly question at all. Youth of opposite ssex may not share living quarters - period - in the BSA. So a 19 year old married couple may share a tent on a Boy Scout outing but not on a Venture outing.

Yeah, the correlation to income level or wealth for that matter, and happiness is not very high. Over 50% of lottery winners report that their lives are 'less happy' after their win than before (I think I read that somewhere ) If one thinks the tax break removals and spending cuts are a good thing - lobby for it. But doing nothing is a spineless, gutless, way to address the problem.

packsaddle, I'm with you 100%. I would feel much safer if guns (all) were banned for use except for our armed services. Yes, all private citizens, police forces, etc. So my question to those that disagree is this. If arming the citizenry is a good thing, why limit a good thing. Why can't I have 0.50 cal gun turrets mounted on the four corners of my house to stop home invasion? Why can't my high school age daughter carry an Uzi to school? Why can't I take my Glock to mass on Sunday? For those who may be analytically inclined, we use this philosophy all the time. To see if a formula is correct, take it to their limits. To me, we would have a safer society if no guns existed as opposed to having everyone armed to the teeth.

I am just a youth scout that has grown up to be a SM for my son and his friend That is a big problem that I see with many Scouters. When I signed up to be a Scouter, I signed up to be a Scouter for the boys in the den/pack/patrol/troop/district/council. I had a youth who was autistic. Granted, when he would get frustrated, he would rarely get violent and his father was usually around for the majority of outings (and did not hover). What helps a lot of these boys is routine and less chaos. What you don't get much of on a youth led outing is routine and you do get much chaos. At first, I got lots of parents telling me I better not assign their child to share a tent with this scout. Finally a mother (not his mother) gave all the other mothers a fairly good lecture (in the best sense of the word) about atracizing and making this kid feel accepted. He later became one of my favorite scouts. A year or so later his younger brother joined and he was much more difficult to integrate into the troop than his older brother. But, it was a good learning experience for both myself, the SPL and other adults and for most of the boys too. I also feel that Scouting helped these boys too. Yes, never compromise safety but heck - we teach these boys to use knives, fire and evern deep fryers! Why can't we manage the same risk with other youth?

As a Scoutmaster, I would decline to lead any troop activities if any of the youth or adults were carrying a fire arm. Idiots can cause problems. Idiots with guns can cause bigger problems. I don't need the "help" of more folks packing heat to "protect" me.

There is no need to assist Webelos Scouts to join a troop to earn the den chief service award. There are many other ways to do that. For example, requirement 11 states: Complete four of these projects: Serve as a staff member of a special Cub Scouting event, such as a Scouting show, bicycle rodeo, etc. Serve as a staff member of a Cub Scout day camp or resident camp. Advance one rank. Assist in recruiting three new Cub Scouts. Assist three Cub Scouts to become Webelos Scouts. Assist three Webelos Scouts to join a troop. Help to plan and carry out a joint pack-troop activity. Recommend to your Scoutmaster, Varsity Scout Coach, or Venturing Advisor another Boy Scout, Varsity Scout, or Venturer to be a den chief.