Feds to hold Scouts Accountable

[Dances with Mice]

And some Scouters will see a screw-up by a Utah troop and roll their eyes. I've been waiting for someone else to bring it up, but nobody has so I'll open the can of worms...

Scout troops sponsored by LDS churches do not enjoy the best reputations for outdoor skills.

[Skidsteer]

And some Scouters will see a screw-up by a Utah troop and roll their eyes. I've been waiting for someone else to bring it up, but nobody has so I'll open the can of worms...

Scout troops sponsored by LDS churches do not enjoy the best reputations for outdoor skills.

They're Hell on wheels when it comes to bicycles.

Jus' sayin'....

[Monkeyboy]

The whole question about any of this not liability....it is negligence.

For example, when a teacher molests a student, the school is not sued for liability, it is sued for negligence. The teacher is liable, but if the school knew of such activity, didn't properly screen applicants, etc...it is found negligent, not liable.

Now, the kids were either on a scout function or not. If they were not on a scout function, the kids are liable and BSA is not negligent, their parents are.

If they were on a scout function (much like the scoutmaster stated earlier that left to go to a bar), it is the boys who are liable and the scoutmaster who was negligent.....to hold BSA responsible, they would have to prove BSA negligent in the positioning of the scoutmaster.

If the scoutmaster was not previously screened, if they did not follow up with the scoutmaster, etc....then BSA could be held responsible, but good luck trying to prove that...

BSA is one of the most stringent background checkers around now, with all of the sexual harrasment charges going around, and any news of a negligent scoutmaster and he is immediately removed, at least in our council.....so I think it would be very hard to find BSA negligent.

[rickb]

How about if this happened at a Council run camp?

Think about it.

17 Kids and no parents. Where else could that happen except at a 2-week camp? Philmont light, as it were.

Or not.

[Dances with Mice]

They're Hell on wheels when it comes to bicycles.

Jus' sayin'....

And if there is a Gawhd then I'm going straight to Hayell for what I did to them two fellahs in white shirts who knocked on my door in college. No doubt about it at all. I stilll feel kinda guilty about all that but our story is probably in some sort of training brochure now.

But that's irrelevant. LDS troops have a reputation for turning out well behaved and polite Eagle Scouts with the outdoor skills of 2nd Class scouts. That reputation may or not be deserved.

Jus' sayin'.

[Monkeyboy]

How about if this happened at a Council run camp?

Think about it.

17 Kids and no parents. Where else could that happen except at a 2-week camp? Philmont light, as it were.

Or not.

Then the article wouldn't be saying things like this -

The government claims the Great Salt Lake Council was negligent in allowing the Scouts to camp without adult supervision. There were 17 Scouts, ages 12 to 14, being supervised by two 15-year-olds, Overby said.

Sorry, but the whole thing just sounds plain fishy.....

What Council allows scouts to go camping without adult supervision.......definately not ours, I can tell you that....

[rickb]

My theory--

It was a council run camp of the mess hall variety.

Older but underage kids ran programs-- with the exception of the waterfront. I am using my imagination here.

One program was an overnight outing a few miles into the backcounty-- away from the tent city and such.

No big deal.

Until the the fires started.

Ooops, they should have hired more 21 year+ olds to work at camp (not an easy thing).

Just my theory.

[weary]

This has nothing whatever to do with scouts. I never got beyond the Tenderfoot (?) stage when my troop disbanded and a nearby church troop announced they were full.

But at the age of 14 or 15 I pedaled my bike with a two-year older brother to Dolly Copp, a National Forest campground near Gorham. It was a 230 mile round trip. An 18-year-old went with us, but he had zero overnight, and/or scout experience and had been told by his doctor that he had a heart condition, and thus was the follower, not the leader.

Anyway, we spent two weeks in the middle of WWII, did the Presidentials, climbed Washington, and had a great time. We built a lot of campfires, but none escaped to burn anything of value.

We repeated the trip two or three times in subsequent years, only driving in model T Fords, which by then had become a hobby. Were we angels? No. Once when a Gorham restaurant asked us to leave to make room for a smoking man and wife, we surreptitiously emptied part of the contents of the ash tray into the pepper shaker, in revenge, or something.

Weary

[ed bell]

Nice exchange of theories here. Someting went wrong enough to get the story to this point. I think the topic has hit the wall of uncertainty. Using a couple of similar news reports has left us with plenty of unknowns. I'm trying not to forget that when I read the responses here. Having said that, starting major forest fires is a SERIOUS crime.

[The Weasel]

The whole question about any of this not liability....it is negligence. ***

If they were on a scout function (much like the scoutmaster stated earlier that left to go to a bar), it is the boys who are liable and the scoutmaster who was negligent.....to hold BSA responsible, they would have to prove BSA negligent in the positioning of the scoutmaster.

MB -

Remember, I'm on the side of the BSA here....

To hold BSA responsible, generally speaking what would need to be shown is (1) that the SM was negligent in his/her supervision of youth; and (2) that she/he was, at the event, acting as a leader in Scouting. While that is a simplification, it's not much of one: Organizations are often held responsible for the acts of their employees and others acting in the course of their duties (including volunteers), under what is known as "respondeat superior," which basically means, "the responsibility of the superior for the acts of the subordinate." When Ford engineers designed a bad gas tank for the Pinto, Ford Motor got hung out to dry; it's a very well known principle.

SMs in situations like that have a duty to act in a reasonable manner - the way a reasonable man or woman in the same situation would act - to prevent harm to other people and to property. If she/he didn't, as a part of Scouting, then they very likely have made their organization responsible, too.

Wish you were right, but I don't think so.

The Weasel

[The Weasel]

And if there is a Gawhd then I'm going straight to Hayell for what I did to them two fellahs in white shirts who knocked on my door in college. No doubt about it at all. I stilll feel kinda guilty about all that but our story is probably in some sort of training brochure now.

But that's irrelevant. LDS troops have a reputation for turning out well behaved and polite Eagle Scouts with the outdoor skills of 2nd Class scouts. That reputation may or not be deserved.

Jus' sayin'.

You may be right. But the only LDS Eagle I know real well right now is Lieutenant in the 3rd Armored Cavalry out of Ft. Collins, and he's on one hellacious big campout right now in Iraq, somewhere not far from Rock. And I knew this kid pretty well, at high adventures as well as the '89 and '93 National Jamborees, and he wasn't exactly mashed potatos when it came to camping.

So knock the Saints all you want, but maybe you're wrong. Seems to me they had a backpacking tradition...it was a long, long walk from Nauvoo.

And after 50 years in Scouting, near enough, this is the first time I ever heard of this "reputation."

The Weasel

[sliderule]

And after 50 years in Scouting, near enough, this is the first time I ever heard of this "reputation."

The Weasel

Same here.

[Skyline]

Jack is correct: Individuals started the fire.

Given that he understands that, I can't fathom why Jack wants to extend responsibility to the BSA.

Other than they have insurance. Is that a good reason?

What do people think the BSA did, exactly?

At worse, my guess is they had a lax policy with regard to how they managed trip reoprts filed by individual troops.

BFD.

The BSA didn't start this fire.

Some kids did.

The kids and/or their leaders may have started the fire. But they were there under the auspices of the Boy Scouts of America. Seems like a shared responsibility to me. And why would BSA and/or its individual troops have so much insurance if they didn't think they might be culpable when something like this happens?

[jollies]

LDS troops have a reputation for turning out well behaved and polite Eagle Scouts with the outdoor skills of 2nd Class scouts. That reputation may or not be deserved.

This is rubbish and obviously a troll response. I hope no one is actually giving this more than a passing thought.

Even though I doubt that I will, if I hear anything further through my inside channels, I'll be sure to pass it along.

[Skyline]

And some Scouters will see a screw-up by a Utah troop and roll their eyes. I've been waiting for someone else to bring it up, but nobody has so I'll open the can of worms...

Scout troops sponsored by LDS churches do not enjoy the best reputations for outdoor skills.

Because the Mormon-backed Scouts have an agenda of religious indoctrination to the exclusion of backcountry skills.

[rickb]

SMs in situations like that have a duty to act in a reasonable manner - the way a reasonable man or woman in the same situation would act - to prevent harm to other people and to property. If she/he didn't, as a part of Scouting, then they very likely have made their organization responsible, too.

Understood.

But for the sake of discussion, if the parent organization were shown to have done everything reasonable and appropriate with regard to establishing policies and following them, doing appropriate backgound checks, monitoring and training, etc, etc, would the BSA still be held responsible?

My guess is that those loooking to exact payment from the BSA will be working very hard to show that the BSA dropped the ball on one or more of those points. Because if the didn't, then they would very likely not get paid. (Or get paid just a small amount for what they can scare out of a timid insurance company).

As this thread progresses, I can think of any number of situations where the Council could have dropped the ball-- but even more where it may not have.

Where is www.thesmokinggun.com when you need it?

[unl1988]

Sounds like a pretty easy thread to allow folks to air their dirty laundry about the Scouts. Sorry that a few individuals caused such a large destruction, but don't use it as a means to bash the entire Scouting program.

Remember, most folks that appreciate the outdoors got their initial experiences through a Scouting program. The Scouting programs go to great length to teach and enforce a Leave No Trace policy and provide a great vehicle to get kids to do something productive.

So, as your airing your grievances about your poor experience on the trail or your personal complaint about the program, remember, the Scouting programs do a lot of good, but can't watch (and be held responsible) for the actions of the minority.

[Jaybird]

[B
14,200 acres burned in Utah in 2002 costing than 12 million to control. I'm sure the kids and parents can not pay that check, so will they sue the BSofA ? Looks like they have a good case .......... The Weasel ?

Sue 'em! Sue 'em!

take those stinkin' badges!

[rickb]

Looks like our government once felt it appropriate to sue the Church over this as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/0...on_n_3212.html

[Dances with Mice]

Looks like our government once felt it appropriate to sue the Church over this as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/0...on_n_3212.html

When the State of Utah sues the Morman Church it's a clear conflict of interest.

Is any Scouter on this thread familiar with the term "Eagle Factories"? If so, would anyone care to define the term as they understand it? If you haven't heard the term feel free to admit that also.