Am I out of line on this one?

[CubsRgr8]

Isn't the crux of the matter that Quixote's post is about a troop outing, vs. a patrol outing? A troop outing requires a tour permit and adult supervision, no exceptions. On the other hand, all a patrol outing requires is the Scoutmaster's approval. Am I right or am I wrong? Although it probably belongs in the Patrol Forum, I would appreciate various scoutmaster's comments regarding what they look for before they give such approval. Thanks.

[Jerry]

Ozemu said, "Me thinks that adults are almost irrelevant to prevention and completey irrelevant to first aid if they don't have the training."

 

I'd say you're half-right. From what I've seen, an adult who's there to "be the adult," and who has no training or understanding of scouting is actually WORSE than no adult at all. Reason is, they assume that since they're the adult, they know better. I've seen adults break up the patrol method when it was properly working, I've seen them teach unsafe toten'chip methods, and I can only imagine the damage that could be done by a panicky parent with no first aid knowledge.

 

I know that lots of troops have a shortage of adult leaders, but I can't help but cringe when we invite a parent with no scouting or outdoors skills out into the field and establish them as an instant authority figure.

[Quixote]

Ok, i'll give some more info....

 

This was a Troop function (about 50-75% of the troop was there - we're a small troop). the comment by one of the other leaders was "but they can't ride without adult supervision" that i found to be almost comical in context because the boys weren't riding on any roads, they were riding on sandy trails for a few miles through the woods. Bicycle helmets were required and radios were with the 2 adult leaders (with family radios) already riding with the boys. As it turns out, they didn't even ride a lot of the trails because they were too sandy - they ended up walking their bikes.

 

My take was that the two adults that were delivering the trailer at the campsight would have been just as well off staying at the campsite in radio contact with the boys and leaders on the bikes.

 

 

[Mike Long]

I've done the bike trip thing before.

 

The adults sat in base camp while the patrols went out trail riding. Each patrol not only had their PL but also had a older Scout from the Venture patrol with them. (The new scout patrol had two.) All PLs and Ventures had radios and were required to check in every hour or when they started or finished a trail. All scouts were required to regroup at the campsite if they were seperated and times were set for lunch and dinner. The park had about 12 bike trails and we knew were the scouts were at all times. It worked out fine. The Scouts had a good time, the adults had a good time, the youth leadership flexed their leadership skills, and they made us adults very happy with the maturity they showed.

 

Train them right and let them run.

[sctmom]

You mean there were already 2 adults with them, but somebody thought ALL adults should go?

[ASM7]

Bob,

I think that firearm ownership laws are state to state. In NC, you only need paperwork to purchase a firearm, not to own one. How do other states do it?

[yaworski]

"I think that firearm ownership laws are state to state. In NC, you only need paperwork to purchase a firearm, not to own one. How do other states do it? "

 

I'm a gun dealer and one of the few that has actually read most of the rules so I'll handle this one. Most states require no paperwork to own a firearm and few require paperwork to buy one from another private individual. However, there is Federal paperwork (ATF Form 4473) required in all 50 states if you buy a gun at a gun store (including Wal-Mart).

 

One of the questions on the 4473 is "Are you the true buyer of the firearm?" The only conditions under which you may legally answer "yes" to this question are you are buying the gun for yourself or you are buying the gun as a true gift for another who is not prohibited from buying firearms. Buying a gun for your neighbor who can't make it to the gun store to take advantage of that sale is considered a "straw man buy" and is a BIG no-no. Organizations and companies may purchase firearms in their own name (security companies are a good example), however, I've never had to deal with this so I don't know what paperwork is involved.

 

 

[mk9750]

Bob and All,

 

I am sorry that my effort at being concise caused me to mislead. The Troop made the decision, did the fundraising, and, with the advice of our Scoutmaster (the MB councelor), chose which rifles to buy. They are in the name, and the possession of, the Scoutmaster. The COR was on the Troop committe and was at the meeting that approved the purchase. they are stored in a secured rifle closet in the SM's home, and each of our boys are subject to a complete NRA safety class before being permitted to handle them.

 

I am not the Scoutmaster, nor do I have much more than a rudimentary understanding of firearms or the MB. I will, however, claim without reserve that the safety of our Scouts, or anyone within range of these rifles has NEVER been compromised. This is a far cry from others we have witnessed in Scouting using firearms. While we were on the range, the Campmaster I spoke of was doing his safety spiel with 4 boys who were starting the MB. It consisted of staying out of the closet under the pavillion at the range, and making sure boys doen't tip over the clay pigeon launcher, because it's been broken so many times before. We won't permit our boys to participate in summer camp rifle programs for the same reason. If I had the choice to subject my sons to a rifle with a full clip and the safety program they pass, or one round and "don't break my equipment", I'll take a full clip any day. The requirement to use one round at a time is "dumbing down" the program to protect against this lack of proper safety training.

 

Which gets us back to the original thread. Boys MUST be given to oppurtunity to lead themselves. But it is irresponsible of adults to allow them without proper training. If a group of boys can maintain a safe trip, and include people who can handle emergencies likely to arise, they should be permitted to do so. If we as adults don't feel that these boys can do this, than they shouldn't be permitted. And if we think they can't, it reflects poorly on us as adult leaders, doesn't it?

[Quixote]

Yes, Scoutmom, there were already 2 leaders riding with the boys, and it was felt that the boys couldn't be left alone with JUST 2 adults.

 

My work is cut out for me...i need a BIG pair of scisors to cut some of these apron strings.

[yaworski]

" This is a far cry from others we have witnessed in Scouting using firearms. "

 

We went to Heritage in Pennsylvania this year and I was very impressed with the rifle range. Not the physical range or the quality of the rifles but the instructor. I've been a shooting instructor for at least 10 years and this guy was impressive. He's an EOD police officer and state skeet champion. He ran a tight ship, made sure the kids learned and they had fun as well.

 

Unfortunately, he might be the exception.

 

 

 

[red feather]

Quixote, unless the other two adults fust wanted to bike with the scouts there was no need for them to go. with two leaders already with them requirements had been met for any question of leadership participation. I agree with proper supervision or contacts no leader would be needed for this type of function.

 

Sounds like you might have parents that want scouts swaddled in bubblewrap and not allowed near hot, sharp or otherwise dangerous things. Hopefully with a little work you can get them to ease off. Good luck.'

 

YIS

[Rooster7]

Rooster, you sound more like the Mother Hen than the Rooster.

 

Maybe.

 

However, in my defense and for some others, perhaps a lot of this debate is related to where one lives. If you live in the D.C. area and picked up the Post or the Times over the last couple of days, you would have read about how police arrested over 50 men for having sex in a Virginia state park. Apparently, the local homosexual community likes to express themselves alfresco, unhindered, and among nature's creatures. There's enough garbage happening in today's society that I don't blame anyone for being over-protective. As for the Scouts being independent, I don't believe you have to experience everything in life to claim that you are prepared. Regardless, I will concede that I probably need to loosen up.

 

As for patrol and troop outings being treated differently by BSA, I don't really understand the logic. Frankly, everything that could go wrong on a troop outing can go wrong on a patrol outing. There are no special or unique circumstances surrounding a patrol that provides it extra protection. If they elect to do an overnight campout, predators could seek them out. The policy is inconsistent. Also, to my knowledge, there is no BSA policy that says an adult cannot come along on a patrol outing. When this is the case, does BSA policy state that two adults must be there? I hope so.

 

[sctmom]

Rooster, just picking on you.

 

You are right about where you live being a factor. While I give my son certain freedoms in our neighborhood, I do not like him having the same freedom at the apartment complex where his father lives.

 

Also, there are some boys I would not allow out of my sight. Some boys also get more foolish in groups than alone.

 

As other pointed out, some adults would be more of a hinderance than help. I don't swim, so to have me as a supervising adult near water is not a good idea.

 

[mk9750]

Yaworski,

 

It is interesting you see Heritage as a fine example of a safe firing range, as it is Heritage that I was speaking of when I said we keep kids away from the range at summer camp.

 

We attend Heritage every other year (odd years), so I was not there this year. But the rangemaster in all of the years I have been there is a rather thin, marines - looking guy. I've spoken with him a number of times, and listened while he spoke with others. He is a VERY nice guy, and I don't want anything I say to be misunderstood. He is a great person.

 

But the safety instruction Scouts get there is woefully less than what the boys in our troop get before they may handle a firearm. I admit to being mostly unfamiliar with firearms, and the MB requirements. Therefore it would be wrong of me to state that this range is unsafe, or that this man jeopordizes the safety of boys. Maybe what he presents is adaquate. But compared to what I have been exposed to in our troop's program, the quantity and quality of these programs can't compare.

 

And it isn't just me or other adults in our troop that feel this way. To a boy (including scouts who are now adults), not one boy in our troop wants to participate in field sports at summer camp because they feel the program is not adequate. Some of this is the quality of the rifles (having our own that the boys are responsible for caring for makes our opinion of summer camp rifles elitist, I presume), but far more than one boy has mentioned that information they have gotten in talking to other boys at camp does not measure up to what they get.

 

One last thing that should be mentioned: Heritage is in the heart of PA, where I assume far more boys are exposed to firearms and have been taught safety by their family. We are a VERY suburban troop. I think 2 boys currently in our troop have fathers who own guns. We might feel (rightfully so, I think) that we need a higher level of training than the average camper at Heritage. I am certain that their program is set up for their most common camper: Boys from PA. For us to ask for more would not be fair. However, for us and our boys to require more before they participate is fair. Viewed in this light, I might have been too harsh criticizing their program.

 

I stand by my criticism of the local campmaster.