What would you do?

[EFD709]

Our scouts attended summer camp last week and there was an incident where the boys were playing with an aresol can around the campfire, with one of the boys throwing the can in the fire, and two others (recent Eagles) using other cans as "torches."

 

THis came to committee last week and our action is pending all the reports and such.

 

Any suggestions as to a disciplinary action?

 

Thanks

 

CCC (Concerned Committee Chair)

[Mike Long]

First off they lose the right (Fireman chit) to use anything with a flame. Matches, stoves, lanterns ect. and must re-earn that right. Part of earning fireman chit is teaching fire safety to others.

 

Second they lose the right to bring aerosol cans. You should think about discouraging these anyway, for a variety of reasons.

 

Third they obviously haven't seen an aerosol can explode or seen severe burns. How about having them help to arrange a troop trip to visit a burn unit at a local hospital and perhaps a service project on the subject of fire safety.

 

That's all I can think of for now.

[ozemu]

Good list Mike.

 

Maybe your local Fire Dept could illustrate the consequences of aerosols blowing up.

[evmori]

Ditto to what Mike posted. I would also schedule a trip to the local fire department for these guys & have the firemen explain the dangers associated with aerosol cans & fire.

 

One more thing. At the summer camp we attend, we are not allowed to bring aerosol cans. Maybe a service project for the camp would also be in order.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[yaworski]

Well, I guess this explains much. I had asked why aerosol bug repellents were banned at camp and was told that boys threw the cans into the fire. My only thought was, "How stupid can they be?" Well, I guess they can be pretty stupid.

 

I knew better than to throw an aerosol can into a fire when I was seven.

[EFD709]

I agree with Mike Long and suggested this at last week's committee meeting.

 

I am all for "scared straight" methodology and believe that the boys would respond positively.

 

What do you think about having the boys attend such a "scared straight" meeting and then preparing a report to present to the entire troop?

 

What about parental involvement? Should we make the parents aware or keep our corrective measures in-house?

 

Our scoutmaster immediately stripped the two Eagles, one his son, of their JASM rank, just earned, when he found out about the incident. I'm not sure I would have done this out of emotion, although I do think they need to earn back his trust.

 

Thoughts?

[Mike Long]

The parents should always be aware of any corrective action.

 

Yaworski, I had the same reaction when I was told about aerosol bans at camp.

 

Stripping leadership is one thing I was unsure of doing but both of them are JASM and Eagles? I would find it appropriate. Leadership is a position of trust and they have violated that gravely. I have seen aerosol cans blow up, I have also seen cigarette lighters blow up and kill people. This isn't a case of boys fooling around, this is a case of older, experienced boys in positions of leadership promoting life threatening behaviour to younger, inexperienced scouts. That needs to be explained to them in no uncertain terms.

[Stan Riddle]

Why not let THEM gather information on the dangers of aerosol cans and fire, and let THEM teach it a a meeting one night? Learn, do and teach! Make it conditional on getting their Fireman's Chit back?

[Quixote]

I agree with Mike on this - the boys should lose their JASM until they prove they can be more mature and responsible.

 

(I remember using aresol cans as torches though not at scouts - amazing how stupid you can be when you're young and invincible)

 

The discipline needs to be as soon as possible as well. This is a great opportunity for the young scouts to see that even their scouting idols (older boys) aren't immune to discipline and learning.

 

Quixote

[Double Eagle]

Mike Long has a good list. Go with that. Maybe these two are OA members that could put on a demonstration as part of camp promotion on fire safety. This could be conducted at a camporee or the other weeks of summer camp.

Removal from position should be probably looked at more. Especially after a cool down period of the SM/parent. I've seen this happen a couple of times and it was more of the parent acting than scouter. They were not put in the position because of one incident, and maybe not punished to that extent for one.

How did they take the action? Not only being punished at camp but to have it continue back in the troop may be a wedge between them and scouting. We "Grumps" make mistakes and I'm an expert. Definitely poor judgement on the fire/can issue.

(This message has been edited by Double Eagle)

[Rooster7]

I agree with the thoughts on this board. However, I would caution against over-reacting. In Scouting, I see two general types of disciplinary problems. One is a matter of self-control. The other is about being malicious. In your story, the Scouts surrendered to their impulsiveness, and failed to restrain themselves from an activity that they knew was wrong (i.e., speaking out of turn, horseplay, playing with fire, etc.). In these cases, while there are varying degrees of wrongness, the Scout is not malicious. In the second group, the issue is maliciousness. That is, the Scout's "pleasure" is derived from someone else's displeasure (i.e., teasing, bullying, theft, destruction of property, etc.). I believe that these two different behaviors deserve two different responses.

 

Here's my point, while I fully agree that the Scouts (in the above story) need to suffer a consequence for their actions, I believe the response should be measured. Given the fact that two of them are Eagles, I have to conclude two things. One, at heart, they're probably pretty good kids. And two, they're probably embarrassed and repentant for their actions. If not, then I'm surprised that they were able to reach the rank of Eagle in the first place. I think the "scared straight" tactic is wise (i.e. visit a burn center). I agree with Mike's suggestionsdefinitely, they should lose the Fireman chit until they prove they've learned their lesson. However, I wouldn't make them do a service project on top of everything else. Also, I would only "suspend" their rank as JASMs for a few weeks. In other words, I think you want to be careful that you do not humiliate these Scouts. Assuming these boys fall into the first group, I have to think that it's not going to take too much to get through to them. While I understand the dangers of fire and why folks are dealing with this matter seriously (as we should)my guess is, these boys probably already understand that point.

 

On the other hand, if these kids fell into the second group of misbehaviors (maliciousness), then I say let the chips fall where they may. I am much less tolerant of this kind of bad behavior. In many cases, these Scouts refuse to recognize their actions as being cruel and/or uncaring. These guys are a tougher problem. So, if you feel that these boys were being extremely callous and had little regard for anyone's safety; that they were not being impetuous, but rather uncaring and self-absorbed, then I say go ahead and pile it on. It'll either make or break them. That is, they'll either eventually bow to the authorities within the troop and recognize their poor attitude, or they'll rebel further and probably drop out (or be booted out). Either way, I say the problem would be solved. I know those last two or three sentences might draw a reaction, but I'm prepared to defend them.

 

Bottom Line: I say show some tolerance and temperance when dealing with basically good kids who've fallen victim to their own impetuousness, but act swiftly and decisively when dealing with kids that are malicious and show little concern for others.

 

I discovered the dangers of an aerosol can at the age of seven or eight. I tossed one into the family BBQ after dinner one day. I remember running around the house playing army with my friends when I heard a loud boom. I sprinted to the backyard to see what had happen and before I knew it, I was breaking out in a very strange dance. My feet had discovered the hot coals, which were dispersed all over our backyard in dramatic fashion. It was a real revelation. After I got over all the weird thoughts that boys have, like "Wow! That was neat!"I realized that my family could have been in the backyard when the explosion occurred. It gave me a few nightmares. Needless to say, I quickly recognized the possible ramificaitons associated with pressurized cans and heat. I never did that again! Sometimes God displays His mercy in unusual ways.(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[mom22scouts]

This topic has pulled me out of "lurk" mode, as this happened at our summer camp several years ago. A 16 year old star scout ignited an aerosol can and it exploded. In addition to being sent home from camp, the scout had to give a presentation on fire safety to the entire troop. I understand he took the assignment seriously and did a very good job.

 

As Rooster mentioned, the other thing to consider is the past history of the scouts involved. In our case, the scout had some negative history. He had on-going issues with inappropriate language, and was supposedly being watched closely after picking up and shaking a younger, smaller scout and saying something that was felt by the younger scout to be a threat. There were many who felt that he should not have been allowed to return.

 

 

[Mike Long]

I agree with you Rooster. Intent definately must be considered and should always be a factor. I'll leave that to the Troop Committee to consider.

 

My list was a set of suggestions. It's up to the Troop Committee to do what they think is appropriate.

 

In my mind over-reacting would be tossing them out their ears with no further consideration.

[shemgren]

The disclpine, yes discpline of Scouts should laid out in your troop by-laws, what is a violation and the consquences for the actions. This policy must be enforced fairly and consitantly. In case of the Scouts in question, the discpline should meet the violation. I suggest the Committee and then PLC lay out these policies as soon as possible.