bullying incident

[yaworski]

"To say "we still don't know if the younger scout did anything to provoke the situation." harkens back to the days when men who molested women would say, "but look how she dresse, she asked for it""

 

This is only true for women and children. If I walked into a biker bar and announced that Harleys sucked, everyone would say, "fool, he got what he deserved."

 

If I go someplace frequented by Marines and announce that Chesty Puller was wimp and a fag, everyone would say, "fool, he got what he deserved."

 

The prudent person doesn't provoke criminal response. Why do you and OGE hide your identities? Because you don't want to be targets.

 

 

[Bob White]

Just as the Lone Ranger before us, we hide our indentities behind these masks not as criminals but as defenders of truth and goodness, and to protect those we love from the evil doers we battle.

In truth OGE is a reporter for a major metropolitan newspaper. I am a wealth industrialist who has chosen the frightening image of the Bob White, creature of the night, to strike terror in the hearts of those would commit crimes.

 

yaworski the last time I heard someone screaming "you can't handle the truth" it was jack Nicholson as that wacked out officer in Afew Good Men. You chose your role model well.

So as Jack said in As Good As It Gets "Go peddle crazy somewhere else, we're all full up here!"

 

Bob white

 

[evmori]

Bob,

I find nothing wrong with using the word provoke. From what I read, the older Scout took the chair but the younger Scout didn't mind. So saying he stole it is not correct. Now he was wrong in not giving it back & his other actions that followed. It is, however possible, the younger Scout asked in an un-Scoutlike fashion for his chair back & that could be the reason why the older Scout refused. The older Scout was still wrong.

 

OGE,

I still think it is possible the older Scout was provoked. Remember, he was lurking in the shadows when the younger Scout was telling the adults what happened & the older Scout probably decided to fess up when asked.

 

I don't condone the older Scout bevhavior. I don't think letting a parent dictate Troop policy is wise either. There is a possibility the next time something happens the younger Scout doesn't like might cry wolf to mom & dad & they will get the problem solved. That's not a good situation.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

Ed there is also the chance that he won't go to the leaders either after being accused of being the one who did wrong and seeing the apathy of the leaders to take any positive actions. When that happens someone could seriously hurt. The same leaders who take no action when they are told of problems are the same leaders who say "they should have told us" when something goes wrong again.

 

How does the older boy lurking in the shadows suggest that the younger one was the provocator? I'm sorry Ed but that makes no sense at all.

 

Bob White

[OldGreyEagle]

Gee Yaworski, given all the great things you have said about me and my opinions and life experiences already it might be fun to see what you would do if you decided to make me a target.

 

Then again, it might not be as much fun as you expect, because I think you would find me just a broken down rusted out husk of a man who perpetually rails at perceived injustices and transgressions perpertrated by the collusionistic denizens of unseen masses whose collective efforts keep me from taking my rightful place as one of the greatest intellectuals of our or any time.

 

You would see how much I pine for the good ol'days where a quick belt across the face and "bein taken to the woodshed" was considered character development. That maybe keeping the wimmin folk barefoot and pregnant was not such a bad idea and who ever thought giving them the vote was a good idea.

 

But most of all, I keep my indentity shielded because I choose to, and perhaps if asked under different circumstances I would reveal my alter ego, but since it matters so much to you...NO!

[yaworski]

I didn't see either movie Bob but I'd be willing to bet that Jack Nicholson didn't say either of those things. His characters did. You see, Nicholson is an ACTOR and he doesn't speak his own words, some one else writes things for him to say. Hey, much the same as you.

 

 

[evmori]

Bob,

I never said that the older Scout lurking in the shadows suggest the younger Scouts was the provoker. What I said was that since the older Scout was lurking in the shadows and knew his goose was cooked, he might have decided to just fess up & take his lumps.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Rooster7]

Bob, I understand what you're saying, but I disagree. I think provocation should be considered. NOT as an excuse, but in regard to motive. If I struck a man because he threatened my family, I think that should be considered by a judge before passing a sentence. If I struck a man because this is how I gain pleasure (by seeing others suffer), then that too should be considered before sentencing. So, if motivation (or the state of mind of the offender) is significant, then I think it's important that one investigates to determine if anything occurred prior to the incident (or crime) to provoke the transgressor. This will help establish his state of mind. Again, this is not an excuse, but it should be considered. Of course, as always, some discernment is necessary. Do you believe "murder is murder" and every incident deserves the exact same punishment?

 

As to this specific case, again, I'm not saying there was provocation. I'm merely agreeing with Ed that the troop should investigate it. I'm not convinced that the matter was looked into thoroughly. After all, the troop basically brushed it off. Why are some folks so convinced that we know enough to make a judgment without any disclaimer? This is my basic complaint. We are given one piece of the puzzle from one person's perspective. My recommendation to maai is to encourage the troop to take the incident more seriously and to investigate further. I say gather more facts before you pass judgment. But if the facts indicate that the boy should be given "the boot", then act accordingly. Still, make sure you know the WHOLE story (if in fact there's more to be told) before you act.

 

[Twocubdad]

You're exactly right that the matter was not looked into thoroughly. That is precisely why the SE should be involved.

 

But let's not get too full of ourselves here. We can debate an issue as an academic exercise, but we're never going to have enough information to make a real decision. We're lucky to get one complete point of view, much less two. That's just a limitation of the medium. I hope that's understood by anyone looking for advice from the group.

 

I will say that in this instance we probably have more information to go on than most since the older boy essentially agreed with the younger scout's version.

[Rooster7]

(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[dan]

Please see the Issues Forum (3 million children) someone (rooster7) made a very good point about this thread. It made me rethink my original solution.

[maai]

This message is from the person who started the thread. Several people have questioned if the younger scout provoked the boy earlier. Not to my knowledge. The younger boy came to talk to the 4 adults in camp that night: after hearing his story, we sent him back to his tent and brought in the older boy for his interview. He confirmed the story: he wanted the chair, he used the language, he did the touching, all because he wanted to keep the chair. Neither boy mentioned any earlier incident. I will also admit that my perception of the older boy is influenced by my own son, who found the older boy to be a person to avoid because of rough play at the weekly scout meetings and insults to other scouts during the camping trip. My son felt that the atmosphere in camp improved after the older boy was sent home.

 

I was astonished at the cover-up by the unit leadership. I can understand the one leader being overwhelmed with responsibilities the following day such that he forgot to take more extensive actions (his idea of punishment was to 'volunteer' the older boy for a service project at camp, digging a hole; I thought service projects were an honor, not a punishment). What I don't understand or condone is the clampdown by the other scout leaders once the parent of the younger boy became involved. They went into denial mode. The parent of the younger boy asked that this be escalated to district leadership, which they refused to do. They kept putting him off, saying "Let the emotions calm down until the fall" and then once the fall meetings started they refused to put it on the agenda. Finally, the only scout leader who thought it had been mishandled put it on the meeting by inviting a representative of the local police. Perhaps they were concerned about legalities and rumors. We were not convinced they were committed to stopping bullying, or even recognizing it, which is why we pulled our son.