Scouters as communist weapons dealers

[Bob White]

And where Kahuna would I find a rule in scouting saying that you had to wear all your knots? Is it before or after the rule about how many side arms you can wear?

 

Could you supply an actual rule of scouting that you feel you can ignore and then tell us how you explain to the scouts that there are rules in their school, home, community that they can ignore if they feel they are small enough or inconvenient enough?

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Kahuna]

BW: I'm not sure there's any limit on the number of sidearms a scout leader can wear, assuming he isn't breaking any laws. :-) My square knot reference had to do with a discussion on another thread where it was suggested that leaders should wear all their square knots.

 

Can you honestly tell me that you have never, in your Scouting career, broken some traffic law or safety rule when Scouts were present? Made a turn without your blinker on or gone 4 miles over the limit on a wide open highway? Do you think most Scouters could honestly answer that they haven't?

 

I could probably cite a number of actual BSA rules that could be violated without bringing chaos into the lives of boys, although I doubt you will agree with any of my choices. I will therefore cite a fairly mundane example, since this all started with uniforms. As you may or may not know, Sea Scouting uniforms are not available from National Supply Service. We essentially buy our uniforms from the Navy. Of course, they don't come with "Sea Scouts, B.S.A." strips sewn on. The cost of obtaining the strips and having them sewn on the uniform is about the same or more than simply having the words embroidered on the shirt above the pocket, using the regular strip as a guide so that it looks the same. So that's what a lot of us do. It is also what the National Sea Scout Commodore does and she wears her uniform at national events including jamborees. Yet, if you read the first two pages of Rules and Regulations as set out in the 2005 Insignia Guide, you will see that no alterations or additions to insignia as approved by the BSA are permitted. I have absolutely no feeling that this contravention is inappropriate and would have no hesitation explaining to youth members that this method is available and simply makes more sense than some alternatives.

[Bob White]

Are you asking if I have ever knowingly igored or violated a law?

 

No, I have not. And I am not alone. I can say with great confidence that neither has my wife, my parents, or her parents. I would be willing to bet that we are not the only people in this country that do not knowingly break a law.

 

Would I ever set an example for the scouts I serve by showing them that if they feel a rule is "small eneough" or that it is is "inconvenient" that it can be ignored.

 

Never. Why would a leader do that?

 

 

And by the way the uniform is meant to have the words SEA SCOUTS sewn above the pocket so whether it is done withn the strip or ebroidered ditrect is fine (we checked) as long as you use the same font size and style.

 

And why, if she is a member of the Sea Scouts, can't she wear the appropriate uniform to scouting events. I really do not understand why you represent these things as rule violations.

 

No foul.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Zahnada]

If we're talking about people who didn't wear the correct uniform, we must not forget Five Star General Douglas MacArthur. I'd say there were probably sentimental reasons that he liked to wear his trademarked outfit.

 

And he wasn't much one for following the rules either. Well, I don't know if it was a rule that he wasn't suppose to bomb bridges on the Yalu river border between North Korea and China. Or if there was an actual rule that he wasn't suppose to antagonize the Chinese by marching towards their border with an army of UN troops. If not rules, he certainly wasn't one to follow orders.

 

And my point? None really. Except now North Korea is run by a mad man with nukes. And MacArthur will always have a black spot on a stellar record.

 

Now, you want a great general? Let's talk about General Matthew Ridgway!

[bbng]

Bob askes some good questions, though the title threw me.

 

In a recent post a scouter bragged on how he knowingly wears an incorrect uniform because it pleases him personally. No other poster said a word about it, even though the writer admitted it was against a BSA rule. A minor rule I agree, but a rule nonetheless.

 

I wonder if he expects the scouts to follow ALL the troop rules, or just the big ones...or just the ones that don't cause the scout personal inconvenience? Can the scout in the troop ignore rules for "sentimental reasons"?

 

I don't think I saw that post, but it could be someone I know. What a slippery slope to use sentimental reasons for uniforming. One leader wanted to wear a particular piece of insignia though he said he knew it was not the right way to wear it. However, he liked it and it had sentimental value to it. Additionally, he didn't like what he should be wearing. Seems harmless, right? Fast forward. Now several leaders are wearing incorrect insignia. Why? Well, why not? They wear what they like, and it's harmless and not real obvious. Fast forward one more time. Newly trained leader comes back from training session that covers the uniform method. Realizing that the way many leaders are currently uniformed is not correct, it's questioned. The answer: we like it this way and think that rule is silly. That's the leaders. Now look at the boys in the troop: not one is fully uniformed. Badges are out of date; no one seems to update them. Shirts are worn hanging loose, and even worse, sometimes unbuttoned over a t-shirt. Pants are a variety of colors and styles, most droopy and none olive. So, one leader makes a deliberate choice, even defends the choice, and knowingly is improperly uniformed and it makes no difference? I wonder...what might it be like if the leader were to now wear his uniform correctly? The message is clear: just because it's a BSA uniform doesn't mean I have to follow BSA uniforming policy--it's mine and I can do with it what I want. In other words, kiss off policy makers, I know better. The attitude, not the uniform, that's the problem. And I cannot accept that a person who knowingly blows off one method to do it his way regardless of how insignificant it may be will limit that attitude to just that method.

[Eamonn]

I can't argue the fact that there is right and wrong.

I think this applies to everything.

I can't defend the wrong doer by saying he is right, because he isn't.

I suppose there are at times extenuating circumstances.

When I attend a Scouting function straight from the office I rarely wear my Scout socks. I know that I'm not wearing them and know that I'm not in full uniform. I also aware that while the BSA doesn't require a uniform for membership it does require that if you wear it you wear it correctly.

Somehow I don't think that I'm going to go anywhere in a handbag because of my non sock wearing violation of the BSA uniform policy.

At times I'm unsure how good a person I am?

Do I do what is right because it is right? Or am I doing it because I might get caught and have to suffer the consequences?

I think I remember seeing somewhere that character is what we do when no one is looking?

I deal everyday with people who cheat!! They don't stick to the diets that we spend a lot of time putting together for them, some sneak and some go as far as to lie. Of course the bad thing is that they are hurting themselves and the people that love and care for them. I do of course care, but I will receive my pay check no matter what they do, still I find myself chastising them and telling them off, in what I hope is seen as me caring for them and wanting them to remain in good health.

I know a lot of people who claim to be Roman Catholics, I see them at Easter and at Christmas. Hey if you are going to cheat and pretend that your something that your not, I think cheating God must top the list at being dumb, unless of course you really don't believe that there is a God.

Eamonn.

[evmori]

Rules are to be followed whether we like them or not. Not everything in a BSA handbook or manual is a rule. There are lots of guidelines. Guidelines aren't rules even though some of us think so.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Kahuna]

Siiiiiigggggh! I knew I was wasting my time, but I got into it anyway.

 

I'm curious who you checked with to get the answer on that uniform issue. Someone who has the authority to waive the Rules and Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America? If those rules are not correct as written (see my citation above), then which other ones are waivable? Can you see where I'm going here? That rule is clear as glass. Yet it doesn't make a diddle of a difference. If that's the case, there must be some more that, while graven in stone, don't matter either.

 

Having said that, I now find I have nothing further to say on this topic.

 

 

[SeattlePioneer]

First of all, I was expecting a thread with unique and highly profitable fund raising ideas. I'm disappointed.

 

Secondly, I'm sympathetic to Eamonn sliding by without those BSA regulation socks! If Bob W would kick him out of his troop as a leader, I can tell you I need him in mine!

 

A few weeks ago, I started a thread about obesity and Scouters, which produced outraged comments about kicking people out as adult leaders because they were obese. I hadn't suggested that, actually. I had asked what we might and ought to do about such folks.

 

The bottom line on that discussion was that nit picking people on details was probably not wise. It's appropriate to look at the contributions as a whole that leaders make. They may fail or be weak in various areas, but make valuable contributions in other, more important areas that justifies keeping them as leaders.

 

On the other hand, a person who publicly states that he knows he's violating a rule and is going to keep doing it starts skating a lot closer to the edge, especially if it actually starts affecting the organization because of that. If Patrol Leaders and Scouts pointed to Eamonn's socks repeatedly as reasons why they didn't have to do things they didn't like, I'd probably make a point of buying an extra pair of Scout socks and having them available if Eamonn showed up without them.

 

What say, Eamonn? Would you help me out if that were to happen?

 

 

 

Seattle Pioneer

[Bob White]

Well At least two people were able to stick to the thread. This is not about the uniform. (by the way the rule is that the words Sea Scouts be embroidered over the pocket not that it be on the strip. The strip is for convenience. It is no different then if the you do your troop numnerals in separate numbers or in a single strip.)

 

The topic is the attitude of big rules little rules. Do the leaders who allow themselves the priviledge of selecting what rules to follow and what rules they get to ignore offer the same leeway to the scouts in the troop?

 

People who cannot be trusted in little things cannot be trusted in big ones. I am amazed that a scout leader would actually have to ask if I follow all the laws as if that would be an unusual thing for a person to do. Of course I do, don't you? What are you doing in a scout uniform telling scouts to be good citizens if you knowingly break the laws of your community?

 

Don't wear your uniform correctly or follow other rules in scouting based on your personal opion. Follow them because as a leader you have a responsibility to teach scouts how to be good citizens.

 

Eamonn

We call them Chreasters. Church goers you only see on Christmas and Easter. They are like the scouters who brag about wearing the full uniform but then don't actually know or follow the program. It's just a show for the public.

 

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Eamonn]

Not to dwell on my socks but...

If I were rushing to do a presentation on correct uniforming I would make sure my socks were in good order.

I have I'm sad to report been caught by Scouts breaking a speed limit. I posted how it happened, but no matter the real point is that a little Lad seen me not keep a rule and I feel that I have let him and myself down. Unfortunately I can never undo what I did and he will remember that I was driving 55 on a road that has a 50 MPH limit.

I do tend to be a rule keeper. Even rules that I may not understand or agree with. I happen to think that at work we have a lot of unnecessary paperwork, some that goes no where and serves no purpose. I have mentioned this to my bosses and they agree, but have said to keep filing it until they find out why we are doing it. Of course I do it, they after all are paying me too.

I really think the idea of not eating meat on Fridays in lent doesn't make me a better or worse person and me tucking into a plate full of fish or shrimp which I happen to like a lot is not in anyway an act of penance. But who am I to go against the rulings of my church.

While I choose to make my services available to the BSA, I was selected by a nominating committee to serve. I serve at the pleasure of the nominating committee and the BSA. Sure I could at anytime quit and move on to some other organization. I don't view my membership of the BSA as my right, I don't own any part of the BSA and the powers that be can and could at anytime tell me to hit the bricks. Sure if this were to happen today, when I don't think I have done anything to deserve this I would be hurt and upset. But I think I seen some where that this is a private organization and if they don't want a displaced Englishman, that's their choice.

As for this cafeteria style of doing things?

I do see Bob Whites point, maybe not as strongly as he has stated it, but I do question the right of people who claim to belong to something and then pick and choose what parts they want to follow.

We have a community brass band that plays in the local town gazebo. They do a few concerts a year and are there for our local fall festival. I wonder what would happen if a few of them decided that they were no longer going to play a certain note? Or that they weren't going to play the same arrangement as the rest of the band? They are all volunteers, but are expected to attend practice sessions and dress appropriately when they are performing in public. I kind of think they wouldn't think of doing any such thing.

Are we that different?

Eamonn.

[evmori]

Never broke a law? C'mon Bob! Never went 1 mph over the speed limit? Never over parked at a parking meter? Never crossed against the light? Never jaywalked? Never coasted through a stop sign? A Scout is trustworthy!

 

Rules are to be followed. Some are more important than others. Some are actually stupid. But they need to be followed. What is the difference in a rule & guideline? Are all guidelines rules?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

I never intentionally broke a law. I never did something knowing that it violated a rule or law. If I parked at a meter I paid. If the speed limit is 35 I drive at 35 or below.

 

I find it fascinating that you find abiding by the law as unusual. Sad more than fascinating I guess.

 

[madkins007]

I am not sure which rules were being followed on a 'pick and choose' basis, but my own feeling is that the BSA has a handful of actual RULES- mostly for safety (and liability), and some for a more uniform program.

 

Then they have a TON of policies, advice, strong suggestions, and more- many of which are often presented as some sort of rule. One example of this is the uniform- it is not required by the BSA, so ownership and wearing cannot be a rule, although if it is worn, the BSA has the right to dictate how it is worn.

 

A lot of the policies, suggestions, etc. make perfect sense, but others do not apply to every unit or situation.

 

As Scouters, it is our job to know which things are rules and which are suggestions- and when we do ignore a suggestion, have a reason for it as opposed to 'just because'.

[Eamonn]

Ed,

I can't help thinking that you have an idea on this already and that your just not sharing it with us.

Any way heres my take for what it's worth.

Laws, rules and guidelines are man made and as such are open to daffynesss.

Sometime back there was a thread, I think started by Unc. About silly laws, some of which are still on the books. There was at one time until very recently a law in England that outlawed soccer. It was made by King Richard I, to try and keep people practicing archery which was at that time vital to the defense of the kingdom. There are other laws that state a bearded man can't beat his wife on a Sunday and laws about whistling. Some for and some against.

How come and why some laws become laws is I think a very interesting subject. The law against soccer may seem silly now, but at the time archery was important and a good rough game of soccer could result in the death of men that could be called upon to defend king and country.

I sat through the 99 minutes of the Webcast where the discussions the Boy Scouts and the land leases in California. Some very wise and learned fellows each gave their interpretation of what the law is really saying. They were on different sides and didn't agree. A judge had passed judgment, but still there were areas that were open to debate. We as civilized people and civilized nations do agree to abide by the laws of the land and if we think they are wrong we try to get them changed in a peaceful civilized way.

If I buy a power tool the guide will tell me that I ought to wear safety glasses, to the best of my knowledge there is no law in the state that I live in that states that I have to wear these. But I know if I don't I'm taking a risk. Which I suppose I am free to take. However if I am teaching people to use this power tool and tell them that there is no need to use safety glasses and one of them gets hurt I think this is negligent. I'm not a lawyer, I don't play one on TV and I didn't spent the night at a Holiday Inn Express.

I for one am saddened that we no longer use the term safe haven in Scouting and don't like the idea that it has been replaced by Calculated Risk. I really wish that we could put our hand on our heart and say that we were a safe haven, but I know that a place where no one gets harmed in body or in spirit just isn't possible.

I as a parent do try and calculate the risk. I know that I would never let my kid go away to camp with a person who has a record of drinking and driving, drug use or child abuse. I of course have no way of knowing the life history of every adult that serves in his Troop. I do have to put my trust in the troop and the BSA and hope that their judgment is sound.

As a parent I use my judgment, which might be wrong, unfair and even prejudiced when I determine who will take my Son away. This as I say might not be fair or right but he is my kid and I have the final word. I don't think I would see a uniform violation as a reason not to allow him to attend an activity with this person. However as has been posted if a guy is willing to bend or break rules that he sees as being trivial or unimportant, he isn't doing much to inspire confidence.

Some people see smoking pot as being a minor thing. I don't and I don't want that person around my kid.

Eamonn.