Water guns

[Beavah]

Anyway, you wanted to know the reason for the policy, I told it to you.

 

Nah, yeh told me your guess as to the reason for the policy. Just as Calico offered his guess and others have offered theirs. I mentioned all the various guesses many posts ago.

 

Can yeh point us to any official BSA document that declares that as the reason?

 

Or are you saying that you are an official spokesperson for the BSA on this matter?

 

Didn't think so. Debunking false claims is only considered arguin' by those makin' the claims, eh?

 

BTW, thanks SSS. I wasn't implying that da Quakers were against squirt guns, which makes the rule all the more odd, doncha think?

 

B

[FScouter]

I think it's a rather disrectful way to justify killing games and fake guns to say that even Quakers with their peaceful ways participate in it.

[CalicoPenn]

Now hold on there Beav, I didn't offer a "clear enough" reason - I offered up a clear example as to why water pistols might be considered simulated firearms (which was promptly subject to an attempt to obfuscate as Airsoft guns) when someone suggested they couldn't see it. And I offered up one possibility that folks may be overlooking as to why there might be this whole simulated firearms business in the G2SS in the first place. That is just a possibility, and I thought I was pretty clear that it's just a possibility - I'll let the folks decide if it's a plausible guess or not.

 

Heck, here's another guess that can be just as plausible in some Councils. There might be some Councils who have gotten sick and tired of parents calling up to complain that their child's fancy super soaker water pistol got broken in a water gun fight or was stolen by another Cub and they want the Council to reimburse them for the cost - point to the G2SS clause on simulated firearms when Council says no water guns and now you have a rule being used to back up their decision.

 

Now if you want to tell us why these guesses are not plausible, by all means, have at it - but don't just dismiss them as mere guesses needing no further challenge. Treat them as the "war games" suggestion is being treated (and I also disagree with that suggestion - for the reasons being given - Capture the Flag is a war game).

 

JoeBob mentions that his Council's (or Districts) new Day Camp Director went to National Camp School this year and came back with information that Water Guns were not allowed. Perhaps folks missed it but I mentioned that this is the same information given back when I went to National Camp School for Day Camps back 30 years ago. Seems that this consistency is being overlooked.

 

I believe Richard has told us what his answer either was or would be when he said he would point to that particular section of the G2SS. I doubt he'll further interpret it beyond that believing that most Scouters are intelligent enough to figure it out on their own, for their own circumstances.

 

The twists and turns we go through to try to justify our points is fascinating in thes forum. Caulk guns, glue guns, flit gun, spray gun, grease gun, etc? Ya know, if your caulk gun is made to look like an M-16, then yeah, it would probably not be allowed because it's made to look like a firearm. At least under a plain English definition of "Simulated" rather than an obfuscated legal-world definition of "Simulated".

 

Is a finger and thumb held in a way meant to suggest a gun a "simulated" firearm? Does it actually look like a gun? No, it lookes like a finger and thumb. Same with a stick. Sure, a lad with imagination might turn a stick into a bazooka, but it still looks like a stick.

 

Now most water guns these days look like something out of the Men in Black alien weapon collection. They don't look like any firearm any of us know. Ok to use? Let's let the Councils make their own decisions (and as Richard suggests when he said some things we may not know by design - Councils may have gotten further directions from National on the interpretation for Council and District run programs (say, in the form of instruction at National Camp School) - it may be possible that Councils are told not to allow water pistols at Council events but they aren't going to tell local units the same thing - remember the discussion of monkey bridges and the height restrictions? A careful reading makes it clear that these restrictions are musts for Council/District but shoulds for Units).

 

Anyone else notice Thomas54's update? The Cubs were allowed to use camp issued water pistols (hmmm, wonder why they couldn't use their own) and could only shoot into a bucket held by another Cub. Does anyone think this was thought up in a vacuum, all on the Day Camp Director's own or can we see the hands of a few other people involved here.

 

 

[ScoutNut]

If the object is to run around and get wet with something that does not resemble a gun in any way, use water squirters that look like fish and animals. Then you are simulating being spit, or vomited, on and not killed. Of course the volume of water is small, but I think crafty scouts can incorporate "drinking from a watering hole" into the game. You can order in bulk from novelty stores.

 

Cubs love water balloons. They are a great way for everyone to get wet. Two lines of boys tossing a water filled balloon back and forth does not even faintly resembles a gun fight.

[Beavah]

Yah, Calico, I agree. All we have are guesses as to da rationale for the policy, and each guess implies different interpretations, eh?

 

The no pseudo-military guess implies water guns and laser toys are OK, but capture the flag and hand salutes and dress uniforms with medals and ribbons/knots are out.

 

The risk-of-being-shot-by-poorly-trained-LEOs implies Airsoft is out, and perhaps carrying a cell phone (which is more common to be shot for than a squirt gun), but paintball on private land would be ok.

 

The risk of encouraging violence would imply no video games or wands or light sabers.

 

The risk of diminishing muzzle control safety for real firearms would suggest more training with real firearms, but not a prohibition on squirt guns or laser taggers that clearly don't look or act like firearms. And we allow this stuff in Venturing and Exploring anyways.

 

The risk of bad PR is unclear, because the large majority of our demographic is OK with guns and supportive of da military and law enforcement, and lasertag and paintball have larger and broader communities of participants than Scouting.

 

And there is no real safety risk.

 

So nuthin' makes sense, eh? It reminds me of prohibitions on dancing or rock music. Leavin' even those who want to be supportive guessing, and even da national H&S director makin' vague references back to da vague wording that everyone is guessin' about.

 

What would be nice is if Irving came out and just said "use your head and your CO's and community's values". Beyond that, the national organization has no interest in commenting on the merits of various toys or games.

 

Beavah

[SSScout]

Clarification: I am speaking for myself, as a Friend (Quaker), and not necessarily for ALL Quakers. I was once told that if you ask any ten Friends (as in Religious Society of) to explain something about their faith, you would get eleven explanations.

 

""I think it's a rather disrectful (sic) way to justify killing games and fake guns to say that even Quakers with their peaceful ways participate in it.""

 

FScout: Where did I ever say anything approaching that? Or were you referring to someone else's comment?

Strategy games, team games, for sure. Make believe killing, no no no...

 

[Jeffrey H]

I can't believe what I am reading. The thought never occurred to me that using squirt guns could even remotely violate G2SS. I concur with others that there is no real safety risk here. A squirt gun does not even qualify as a "simulated firearm."

 

In Cub Scouting, we are often trained to "keep it simple, make it fun." In my Pack, water guns are a simple and enjoyable active outlet for the boys. Until I receive a "stop doing that" order from my District or Council official, I will continue to allow squirt guns as an outdoor option.

 

 

 

 

[qwazse]

A squirt gun (i.e., the generic brightly colored bulbous variety -- although, now that the gun show guys have guns with pink stocks to cater to the ladies, whose to say that line isn't getting blurred as well?) is a simulated crowd control device, not a fire-arm.

 

Marshmallows simulate rubber bullets. The intent is to startle/restrain not harm/maim.

 

There is no prohibition in G2SS against simulated anti-riot gear.

[Twocubdad]

Say I read the regs such that squirt guns are okay. What's the down side? Anyone ever hurt in an illegal squirt gun shoot out? Any adult's membership ever stripped for sanctioning a squirt gun battle? Insurance cancelled?

 

Please don't go down the "A Scout is Obedient" road. We've done that enough in Uniforming threads. Assume someone honestly doesn't believe squirt guns are banned or just ignorant of the policy.

 

There must be more pressing issues to worry about.

[RichardB]

So what about the argument that "water pistols" are only appropriate for Venturing? Had not seen it tossed out yet.

 

The site counter informs me that there are 1253 active users. About .1% of the regsitered adults. Can you imagine what the 99.9% also come up with as what is a "water gun" and how can I use it.

[Beavah]

So what about the argument that "water pistols" are only appropriate for Venturing? Had not seen it tossed out yet.

 

Yah, but when transportin' 'em at camp, do yeh have to keep 'em unloaded and in a locked case?

 

I wouldn't worry about 99.9%. I doubt what you're puttin' out is reachin' more than a few percent anyways. Besides, yeh have a good cross-section here that establishes that, as written, the language is confusing to a group of more experienced volunteers and apt to be interpreted in absurd ways as people guess at what the purpose is. Any decent attorney would take that to the bank, eh? Just like anybody worth their fee would shred us on the long, confusin' morass of rules and trainin' we have right now. So I'm genuinely not sure what da approach accomplishes, other than annoying good volunteers and stopping the cub scouts from getting wet.

 

Scoutin' is all about judgment. The environment and the kids are too complex for a regulation regimen, and we don't have the resources to put one in place anyway. So the goal should be to guide and inform judgment. Seems to be what you're after, too, but da materials and institutional culture all seem to push people da other way.

 

Beavah

 

[5yearscouter]

Richard B writes "The site counter informs me that there are 1253 active users. About .1% of the regsitered adults. Can you imagine what the 99.9% also come up with as what is a "water gun" and how can I use it. "

 

While the site counter shows you how many active users,

this site is used by a bunch more scouters as their source of clarifying information about confusing BSA policies, when BSA policy writers refuse to clarify the information themselves. Like in this instance.

 

I read at this site for almost 5 years before ever registering, and have learned a LOT from the experience around these here parts.

 

The G2SS could word the policy clearer--probably would still be misinterpreted.

 

If you want no running around with simulated weapons in war type games, then say so and be specific about what kinds of things you want units to avoid.

 

 

Of course then at our Nationally Accredited Cub Scout Day camp that just received a perfect score this June--- water balloon fights would probably be nixed. Even though water balloon fights are about the #1 way we keep almost 3000 cub scouts and a boatload of adults cool enough in June in Phoenix Arizona to avoid heatstroke.

 

 

If you want no projectiles shot at other scouts, then say that and take marshmellow shooters off the list of BSA popcorn prizes. By the way, they are LOUSY at shooting marshmellows, even stale ones. But they shoot small bouncy balls very well even though they do hurt if they hit you just right.

[drhink]

Instead of whining about what you can't do, figure out what you can do. Just get a little creative. Ever play soccer with water guns and a beach ball? Works in a pool, in a field, or a parking lot, and shooting water at an inflatable ball is not contrary to GSS. And everybody gets wet, intentional or not. Just make sure you have some rules in place so nobody gets hurt. In the time it takes to read this entire thread, most of you could have invented at least a half dozen games involving water guns where the primary target isn't another person and the probability of staying dry is zero.

 

Some of the best water battles I can recall were at BSA summer camps where we used the Indian Pumps, although it was officially called "staff camp fire safety training".

[FScouter]

"The G2SS could word the policy clearer--probably would still be misinterpreted."

Ain't that the truth! It's either to vague, or too explicit and overbearing, or just plain dumb, depending on the agenda of the person making the comment. Things get "interpreted" to be what the reader wants it to be. When in doubt, too many of us just trash BSA and those folks that wrote it.

 

"If you want no running around with simulated weapons in war type games, then say so.."

 

And it does not "say so", except as "interpreted" by those that either want to do that, or want others to stop doing that.

 

Refer the the BSA mission for clarification on what to do when confronted with a dilemma.

[TWOMORROWS]

It might be possible to use "pressurized water dispensers" to let the boys get each other wet!!!