David CO

I think the OP may have given us one possible reason for unit leaders' response (or lack of response) to the situation. I think we all agree that a scout should be judged on his own conduct. His parents' popularity should have nothing to do with it.

Sure. The 24/7 thing applies for some things, but not for others. Exactly where it applies is a source of constant disagreement between scouters both on this forum and in the real world. As a practical matter, most unit leaders don't want to take on the roles of police/lawyers/courts. We don't want our committee meetings to turn into a courtroom drama. We leave that sort of thing to the professionals. I would not penalize the family for volunteering information about the drug testing. While it is not a privileged conversation, penalizing the family would discourage others from engaging in open and frank conversations in the future.

Because the scout is accused of possessing and using marijuana on the Chartered Organization's property, I think it is absolutely necessary to inform the COR (even if this means that the investigation and decision making process might be taken out of the hands of the unit leadership).

It sounds like you are an ASM, and you disagree with how the SM is dealing with these situations. You may be right, but I would still suggest that you let the SM take the lead in making disciplinary decisions.

I can think of a more accurate description, but I can't say it on this forum.

I don't see the point in rescinding a rank. It won't keep the media from pointing out that the offender was a former eagle scout.

I've been thinking about that. I really hope that these friends weren't other boy scouts.

That makes sense. Only the most egregious cases get sent to adult court. Those offenders are more likely to be repeat offenders regardless of which court hears the cases.

That makes sense. A tax accountant should know better. Tax accountants have specific training in this area. Does a tax accountant have any sort of special training in the area of sexuality? I don't think so. So I would hold an accountant to the same standard in regard to sex offenses.

Interesting that you should ask that. This exact scenario is discussed in the sex education unit of my Health class. We teach our students that an intoxicated person cannot consent to sex. Having sex at a party with an intoxicated person is rape. Sadly, this is not a rare or unusual occurrence at a teenage drinking party. It happens all the time. I don't think the boy in this case had any misunderstanding about what he was doing. In his emails to his friends, bragging about his crime, he described his sexual encounter as a rape. He knew what he was doing, and he knew that it was a crime.

I wouldn't go that far.

I have never seen any appreciable difference in good/bad behavior between the Boy Scouts and the rest of the students in my classes. The Boy Scouts behave about the same as everyone else. Some are good and some are bad. One of the worst behaved students in my Health class this year happened to be an eagle scout, OA member, and senior patrol leader. His bad behavior at school doesn't seem to be taken into consideration by his scout unit when evaluating his scouting spirit. I think the reason this story is receiving so much attention is not because the boy is an eagle scout, but because the judge used his status as an eagle scout as a justification for giving him more lenient treatment. This is wrong. An eagle badge should not be used as a "get out of jail free" card.

I am not opposed to having a juvenile justice system that can consider the age and maturity of the offender. I am opposed to a justice system that imposes harsher penalties on poor and disadvantaged kids.

There is a news article online today that says an 16 year old boy who has been accused of sexually assaulting a girl in New Jersey was shown leniency by the judge because he is from a good family, has good grades, and is an eagle scout.

The CC will eventually need to discuss the dismissal of a volunteer with the COR, since the CC needs the signature of the COR when it comes time to replace the volunteer. The COR is almost certain to ask what happened with the old scout leader, particularly if that scout leader had been in the position for a while. It would make more sense for them to have this discussion sooner rather than later.

Oh, Please! Don't you guys ever get tired of sucking up to your bosses.

Are you talking about Jimmy Carter and his secret service bodyguards? This would be an understandable exception. We all know that those vicious killer rabbits were all out to get him.

eek. We wouldn't want to do that.

OK. The scouts don't want to go home, so they accede to the search. Nothing is found. Is it now over? Is that the end of it? Or should there be some sort of review process?

What is your personal concern about the search? Why do you want to pursue this?

That was my first thought. But vaping is another possibility.

BSA should really get with the times. Aside from the uniformed police officer, we have 4 other people at our public middle school who carry concealed weapons for the protection of the students. The uniformed officer knows who they are. So does the administration and the school board. Nobody else needs to know. By the way, I'm not one of them. I'm a klutz. I would probably blow my fool head off.

They conducted a search and found absolutely nothing? That must have made them look pretty foolish.

True. But you might also recall that I was an elected school board member for my communities public grade schools and middle school. That was very much a governmental thing. I agree that public schools and parochial schools are not the same.

I hope you appreciate the fact that I am showing great restraint by not replying to the posts of those who are claiming to understand the law regarding school searches. It's not easy. It really isn't.