Individual Trust vs Collective Benefit - Should Boy Scouts Keep Their Knives?

[Furunculus]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6145785/Scouts-to-no-longer-bring-penknives-on-camping-trips.html



Scouts to no longer bring penknives on camping trips
Their motto is "Be Prepared" but Scouts will soon have to survive without their trusty penknives on camping trips thanks to Britain's growing knife crime culture.

By Chris Irvine
Published: 10:44AM BST 06 Sep 2009
Scouts will soon have to survive without their trusty penknives on camping trips thanks to Britain's growing knife crime culture.
Scouts used to be allowed to carry sheath knives on their belts

New advice published in Scouting, the official in-house magazine, says neither Scouts nor their parents should bring penknives to camp except in "specific" situations.

Scouts have traditionally been taught how to use knives correctly, using them on camping trips to cut firewood or carve tools.

Related Articles

*
Scouts face reduced activities or higher subs after new £1.5m water bills
*
Scouts train anti-terrorism badge
*
Cubs and scouts rejecting traditional badges for modern pursuits
*
Scouts introduce recycling badge
*
Scouts refuse to allow boy who won't swear to Queen

At one point Scouts were allowed to carry a sheath knife on their belt as part of their uniform although this is no longer the case. In recent years the Scout Association guidance has been that parents should carry knives to camps or meetings.

Dave Budd, a knife-maker who runs courses training Scouts about the safe use of blades, wrote that the growing problem of knife crime meant action had to be taken.

"Sadly, there is now confusion about when a Scout is allowed to carry a knife," he wrote. "The series of high-profile fatal stabbings [has] highlighted a growing knife culture in the UK.

"I think it is safest to assume that knives of any sort should not be carried by anybody to a Scout meeting or camp, unless there is likely to be a specific need for one. In that case, they should be kept by the Scout leaders and handed out as required."

Troops leaders however have said the decision is "very sad". Sheila Burgin, from 4th Sevenoaks Scout Group in Kent, said: "Scouts by law are allowed to have Swiss army knives. I think this is going too far – you just don’t know when a Scout will need a knife.

"It is also suggested that the leader keeps control of the knives when they go camping, but I think that is completely wrong. The first Scout Law is 'The Scout is to be trusted'. Scouts love having knives and using them properly. There is nothing wrong with it."

Miss Burgin, who offers lessons in carving using penknives, added: "If you teach children to use a knife properly they won’t abuse it. If someone wants to cause harm they will do it anyway. It is a real shame it has come to this."

A Scouts spokesman said: "We believe that young people need more places to go after school and at weekends, where they can experience adventure without the threat of violence or bullying and the need to carry weapons.

"Scouting helps to prepare young people with valuable life skills, while keeping them safe by not carrying knives."

[tibilicus]

It's a sad reflection of today's society when boy scouts can't even be trusted to carry penknives with them. I remember as a youngster that me and my friends all used to have penknives. We used to do all kinds of cool stuff with them out in the woods and on camping trips. I remember one of my friends had a huge swiss army knife, it had so many different knives, blades, bottle openers etc.

Anyway, not once did me and my buddies have the wild urge to stab each other or any one else, I doubt the average boy scout does either..

[Banquo's Ghost]

Seems perfectly sensible to me. Because everyone knows the terror that Scouts bring to the elderly and infirm. Why, I've seen gangs of khaki-shorted youths singing around campfires after dark in many a sink estate.

More importantly, small boys in possession of a knife might just cause complications for Akela and his unslaked lusts.

I'd take their woggles away too, just to be on the safe side.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Nanny state run amok. Lord Baden-Powell must be rolling in his grave.:thumbsdown:

[Furunculus]

i'm all about individual trust and responsibility, scouts should keep their penknives because i believe this is more important than collective security:


1. A SCOUT'S HONOUR IS TO BE TRUSTED. If a scout says "On my honour it is so," that means it is so, just as if he had taken a most solemn oath. Similarly, if a scout officer says to a scout, "I trust you on your honour to do this," the Scout is bound to carry out the order to the very best of his ability, and to let nothing interfere with his doing so. If a scout were to break his honour by telling a lie, or by not carrying out an order exactly when trusted on his honour to do so, he would cease to be a scout, and must hand over his scout badge and never be allowed to wear it again.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Such is no longer the case, I expect they are given multiple chances to disapoint their superiors and dishonour themselves and their uniforms.

Such it was when I was an ACF Cadet.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Ridiculous, if anything this will strengthen the association of knives with random stabbings rather than actually teaching people what they are really for.

And so, when these kids do eventually pick up a knife, they will see it as a weapon and not a survival tool.

It's like with guns. To older people brought up in the country, they will always associate them with hunting or whatever. Give a gun to my younger brother and he'll start brandishing it around like he's a gangster.

As Hosakawa said, it's the nanny state gone wild.

[Husar]

Just wait, not long and every british woman who wants to cook will have to call the police first to have a supervisor come over, bring her a knife and watch her use it, then take it back to the police station and lock it away safely. After all you never know whether she is a thug, a terrorist or even a soviet sleeper. :sweatdrop:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Ridiculous, if anything this will strengthen the association of knives with random stabbings rather than actually teaching people what they are really for.

And so, when these kids do eventually pick up a knife, they will see it as a weapon and not a survival tool.

It's like with guns. To older people brought up in the country, they will always associate them with hunting or whatever. Give a gun to my younger brother and he'll start brandishing it around like he's a gangster.

As Hosakawa said, it's the nanny state gone wild.

If that's so you need to teach him that the cricket bat it mightier than the gun.

[HoreTore]

Every time a politicians or government official talks about security, I have an urge to vomit.

[KukriKhan]

Every time a politicians or government official talks about security, I have an urge to vomit.

"Every time a politician or government official talks about security.." I reach for my wallet. And now also, my handkerchief. :)

Which sits close by my Swiss Army Knife. Without those 3 things (+ a packka smokes & lighter), I'd be nekkid. And nobody wants that.

[Louis VI the Fat]

*Dissenting opinion*

The boy scouts are a proto-fascistoid organisation. Little boys in faux military uniforms being indoctrinated into collectivism, militarism, the fatherland and fascistoid codes of honour. They belong to the first half of the 20th century. 'Be Prepared' - those are the exact words East German kids had to start their day with: 'Seit Bereit!'.

I'll accept that current practices are more innocent, that nowadays it is all more about having some kids make some friends and spend some time outdoors. Part of turning the Powell-Jugend into this more innocent practise is to not parade them around in armed uniforms anymore, or to teach them military skills with kiddie arms like knifes.

[CountArach]

"dangerous relic; unbridled individualism is poison to the progressive goal of collective security"

Who said that was the goal of progressivism and at that cost?

I refuse to vote in a poll with an option so blatantly biased as this.

[Furunculus]

*Dissenting opinion*

The boy scouts are a proto-fascistoid organisation. Little boys in faux military uniforms being indoctrinated into collectivism, militarism, the fatherland and fascistoid codes of honour. They belong to the first half of the 20th century. 'Be Prepared' - those are the exact words East German kids had to start their day with: 'Seit Bereit!'.

I'll accept that current practices are more innocent, that nowadays it is all more about having some kids make some friends and spend some time outdoors. Part of turning the Powell-Jugend into this more innocent practise is to not parade them around in armed uniforms anymore, or to teach them military skills with kiddie arms like knifes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scouting_controversy_and_conflict

The absence of real military aspects does not mean that Baden-Powell was anti-military. His efforts for peace became stronger in time, making him anti-war, but he disapproved of anti-militarism. He even did not see any harm in training in a military way.[18][20] One reason for not using military items can been seen from his reaction on the Boys Brigade. It was the intention of Baden-Powell to make an attractive boys game and he thought that the military was not attractive enough.[17] The second reason was that some parents would object military training, which would limit the reach of Scouting.[21] There was probably another reason. The centre of his Scout method was individuality (opposite to the group), making own decisions (opposite to following the commander), doing good turns, self-learning (opposite to instruction by drill)[21] and a game based on theatre and "make believe". These would never survive in a military scheme. Baden-Powell did use some parts of his profession which he found useful, like the uniform and some names, but these are always externals, never the essential fighting intention of military nor specific military techniques.

[Furunculus]

"dangerous relic; unbridled individualism is poison to the progressive goal of collective security"

Who said that was the goal of progressivism and at that cost?

I refuse to vote in a poll with an option so blatantly biased as this.

ok :)

[Centurion1]

I am an eagle scout and i never had the urge to stab anyone with my knife. Bah, "growing knife culture" what rubbish. It has a growing knife culture because guns are illegal and criminals find it easier to get knives. I don't mean to turn this into a gun rights thing but that factors in.

[HoreTore]

I am an eagle scout and i never had the urge to stab anyone with my knife. Bah, "growing knife culture" what rubbish. It has a growing knife culture because guns are illegal and criminals find it easier to get knives. I don't mean to turn this into a gun rights thing but that factors in.

I'd say it's far, far preferable to have a "knife-culture" than a "gun-culture".

[tibilicus]

I'd say it's far, far preferable to have a "knife-culture" than a "gun-culture".

The problem is though it's a lot easier to get a knife than it is to get hold of a gun. Any one can go into their Kitchen and pick up a knife. The solution isn't the current position which the UK government is trying to pursue. I read some where about this ridiculous idea of bringing in blunt knives so you can't actually stab some one. The sensible idea would be to give children knives but teach them how to use them properly. It takes a certain person to pick up a knife, and normally that person does it either because they need to (east London FTL) or because they feel it makes them a bigger man. Either way a knife needs to be seen for what it is, a tool, not a weapon..

[naut]

I read some where about this ridiculous idea of bringing in blunt knives so you can't actually stab some one.
I do hope that where ever you read that it was a satire. :laugh4: Otherwise. :shame:

[Crazed Rabbit]

"dangerous relic; unbridled individualism is poison to the progressive goal of collective security"

Who said that was the goal of progressivism and at that cost?


Progressives themselves and their actions? :idea2:

CR
~;p

[Aemilius Paulus]

Ridiculous, if anything this will strengthen the association of knives with random stabbings rather than actually teaching people what they are really for.
That's quite funny, as I always thought knives were originally made for specifically that purpose. They were weapons before they became an everyday utility.

Now, I do not support the confiscation of knives form the Boy Scouts, but still, a knife is a knife. It was not a tool, unless you mean "a tool of war".

[Rhyfelwyr]

That's quite funny, as I always thought knives were originally made for specifically that purpose.

That may be true (I have no idea tbh). What matters though is how we see them being used throughout our lifetime. Trying to hide children from any exposure to knives won't help. It's like with alcohol, in the continent children are allowed some in their own homes, so it doesn't seem a big deal. But here where you don't touch the stuff until you're maybe 14 or so, suddenly everyone's a binge drinker because there is a whole different culture surrounding the stuff.

[Crazed Rabbit]

That's quite funny, as I always thought knives were originally made for specifically that purpose. They were weapons before they became an everyday utility.

Now, I do not support the confiscation of knives form the Boy Scouts, but still, a knife is a knife. It was not a tool, unless you mean "a tool of war".

What? I think knives probably came about as cutting tools before they were ever used in war. They aren't very good for combat because they're so small. A simply pointed stick or club would be better. But I can't be sure.

As for modern times, they are far from a 'tool of war' - they are carried in wartime for the same reason they are carried by civilians - as a tool to cut things and the like, not to kill people. The people who do use them as weapons are people who likely weren't given any instruction as to proper knife use, are criminals who don't follow the law anyway, or carry them to protect themselves from criminals because England's coppers are more interested in fining people than arresting criminals.*

CR
*A generalization. However, as is generally the case when I generalize, I don't care.

[Furunculus]

That may be true (I have no idea tbh). What matters though is how we see them being used throughout our lifetime. Trying to hide children from any exposure to knives won't help. It's like with alcohol, in the continent children are allowed some in their own homes, so it doesn't seem a big deal. But here where you don't touch the stuff until you're maybe 14 or so, suddenly everyone's a binge drinker because there is a whole different culture surrounding the stuff.

agreed, we will not escape the need for sharp pointy things in our lives before the advent of food pills and silver jump suits.

thus we must continue to use knives and educate children in how to use them and in what manner it appropriate to use a knife.

the scouts have been doing that for a long time, this foolish act will only diminish that social service.

[HoreTore]

The problem is though it's a lot easier to get a knife than it is to get hold of a gun. Any one can go into their Kitchen and pick up a knife. The solution isn't the current position which the UK government is trying to pursue. I read some where about this ridiculous idea of bringing in blunt knives so you can't actually stab some one. The sensible idea would be to give children knives but teach them how to use them properly. It takes a certain person to pick up a knife, and normally that person does it either because they need to (east London FTL) or because they feel it makes them a bigger man. Either way a knife needs to be seen for what it is, a tool, not a weapon..

Easier to get hold of? Yes, kitchen, fishing and tool knives are easy to get hold of.... And much less dangerous than a simple baseball bat.

[Aemilius Paulus]

What? I think knives probably came about as cutting tools before they were ever used in war. They aren't very good for combat because they're so small. A simply pointed stick or club would be better. But I can't be sure..
Well, actually, knives were the first weapons invented by humans, for use against other humans mainly, but also later to assist in cutting meat (which really, was done with sharpened stones and not proper knives). That was before the advent of a hatchet, long before the invention of the spear, and millions of years before the bow.

You see, when the knife was introduced, it was a cutting-edge, state-of-the-art weapon which was useless against animals, too precious to be used for cutting meat, but just right for inter-species warfare - the most dangerous hunt of them all as they say (although back then this statement was not always so true). Or so the theory goes. Yes, clubs and sticks were used against animals, but knives are perfect against other proto-humans.

[Crazed Rabbit]

You see, when the knife was introduced, it was a cutting-edge, state-of-the-art weapon which was useless against animals, too precious to be used for cutting meat, but just right for inter-species warfare - the most dangerous hunt of them all as they say (although back then this statement was not always so true). Or so the theory goes. Yes, clubs and sticks were used against animals, but knives are perfect against other proto-humans.

Who's theory, exactly? Because even today I'd rather have a baseball bat than a knife in a fight.

CR

[HoreTore]

Well, actually, knives were the first weapons invented by humans, for use against other humans mainly, but also later to assist in cutting meat (which really, was done with sharpened stones and not proper knives). That was before the advent of a hatchet, long before the invention of the spear, and millions of years before the bow.

You see, when the knife was introduced, it was a cutting-edge, state-of-the-art weapon which was useless against animals, too precious to be used for cutting meat, but just right for inter-species warfare - the most dangerous hunt of them all as they say (although back then this statement was not always so true). Or so the theory goes. Yes, clubs and sticks were used against animals, but knives are perfect against other proto-humans.

wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife) proves you wrong....


A knife is any cutting edge or blade, handheld or otherwise, with or without a handle. Knives were used at least two-and-a-half million years ago, as evidenced by the Oldowan tools.[1][2] Originally made of rock, flint, and obsidian; knives have evolved in construction as technology has with blades being made from bronze, copper, iron, steel, ceramics, and titanium. Every culture has a unique version of the knife. A knife may be either a fixed-blade or a folding version with blade patterns and styles as varied as their makers and countries of origin. Due to its role as mankind's first tool, certain cultures have attached spiritual and religious significance to the knife.

The earliest knives were shaped by knapping (percussive flaking) of rock, particularly harder rocks such as obsidian and flint. During the Paleolithic era Homo habilis probably made similar tools out of wood, bone, and similar perishable materials that have not survived.[2][3] As recent as five thousand years ago, as advances in metallurgy progressed, stone, wood, and bone blades were gradually succeeded by copper, bronze, iron, and eventually steel. The first metal (copper) knives were symmetrical double edged daggers, which copied the earlier flint daggers. In Europe the first single edged knives appeared during the middle bronze age. Modern knives may be made from many different materials such as alloy tool steels, carbon fiber, ceramics, and titanium.

[Aemilius Paulus]

wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife) proves you wrong....
How so?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Who's theory, exactly? Because even today I'd rather have a baseball bat than a knife in a fight.

CR

I would rather have a knife...you have to swing a baseball bat.

[HoreTore]

How so?

Because it says knives were used as tools? :inquisitive:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

How so?

Spears were the earliest weapons.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Spears were the earliest weapons.
Not true. Definitely not true. This should be obvious. Sharpened stones were the first weapon, and they had to evolve long and hard until they were suitable for spear-points.

By the time proto-humans could make delicate spearheads, stone daggers were long commonplace. Not only is this what I always read, but it is also common sense. Declaring that spears came before knives is not too far from stating the musket came before gunpowder.



Because it says knives were used as tools?
Of course they are tools. The sharpened stones were tools. Real stone daggers were weapons back when they were the pinnacle of technology. Then other weapons arrived on the scene, and the daggers went back to being tools.

It would have been an utter waste to dull the innovative daggers with the cutting of the flesh & bones - a task a sharp stone could perform even better than the fragile, brittle knife. Once again, not only a fact, but also common sense. Try to use a flint or obsidian knife to dismember an animal. I remember my mother breaking a steel knife wrestling with a chicken bone - imagine what would happen to a Palaeolithic tool encountering a mammoth or a bison.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Not true. Definitely not true. This should be obvious. Sharpened stones were the first weapon, and they had to evolve long and hard until they were suitable for spear-points.

Who says you couldn't make a spear with just sharpened wood on the point? :rolleyes:

Anyway, I don't even see how depriving scouts of knives could provide any sort of 'collective' benefit.

CR

[Aemilius Paulus]

Who says you couldn't make a spear with just sharpened wood on the point? :rolleyes:
Because then it is a sharpened stick. What archaeologist mean when they say "spear" is a stone tip on a wooden pole. All what I read on the Palaeolithic is careful to differentiate between a sharp stick and a "real" spear.



Anyway, I don't even see how depriving scouts of knives could provide any sort of 'collective' benefit.

Less Valium for the over-protective mothers - there is a benefit that is collective. Really, that is the only issue here. That and the propensity of politicians to always fix what is not broken while conveniently neglecting the real problems. It is truly an arduous task to fail when you fix an already working thing - that is why they do it so much. Healthcare is a pain in the rump to reform, so to avoid accusations of failure, they side-step it.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I would rather have a knife...you have to swing a baseball bat.

Same here, although that's probably due to living in the central belt of Scotland more than anything else.

[Furunculus]

the entirety of page page 2 is OT, though a very interesting debate in its own right.

[Centurion1]

sorry to take this off topic but i must say one more thing.

The knife was the first tool. hunting with stones and sticks came long before inter-species warfare. you could construe that they were also used for defense against predators but the knife should always be considered a tool and not a weapon first.

[HoreTore]

It would have been an utter waste to dull the innovative daggers with the cutting of the flesh & bones - a task a sharp stone could perform even better than the fragile, brittle knife. Once again, not only a fact, but also common sense. Try to use a flint or obsidian knife to dismember an animal. I remember my mother breaking a steel knife wrestling with a chicken bone - imagine what would happen to a Palaeolithic tool encountering a mammoth or a bison.

What do you think the first tools and weapons were made of, exactly? :dizzy2:

[Aemilius Paulus]

What do you think the first tools and weapons were made of, exactly? :dizzy2:
Sorry, do not understand. Please re-iterate&clarify.

[Sheogorath]

As an Eagle scout myself, I have to say, this is quite silly.

I was in several troops over the course of my 'career'. Some of them were very bad. However, despite the presence of knives in the hands of people I would not hesitate to label 'hooligans' I was never threatened with one. I was beaten up once, shot at with a blowgun, and given any amount of rat-tails, Indian-burns and so forth, but I was never threatened with a knife, even jokingly. Even by the over-aggressive idiot jock who's equally stupid father bought him a bowie knife.

Even the worst boy scouts are made extensively aware of the uses of knives. Those who've been in since cub scouts even more so. I've been using knives as tools since I was about ten or so. They're amazingly useful things. I can't say I've ever, for example, performed an emergency appendectomy with a pocket knife, but I have made fires, a boat, various camp furniture, gutted fish and so forth. Next to a satellite phone, a knife (or sharp edge of some kind, anyway) is probably one of the most useful things you can have in a survival situation. Or if you're just bored and have a large supply of wood handy.

You can rest assured that there is no danger of armed bands of boyscouts running around stabbing people with knives. I'd be more worried about their habit of playing the old game of 'Will It Burn?'

Good times.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Not true. Definitely not true. This should be obvious. Sharpened stones were the first weapon, and they had to evolve long and hard until they were suitable for spear-points.

Nope, first weapons were the "digging sticks", wooden spears and tools sharpened against rocks and hardened in fire.

No spearpoint needed.


By the time proto-humans could make delicate spearheads, stone daggers were long commonplace. Not only is this what I always read, but it is also common sense. Declaring that spears came before knives is not too far from stating the musket came before gunpowder.

The first stone tool was the handaxe, it's pretty useless weapon, it's just a rock with an edge. You'd be better off just using a rock to bash soneone's head in. We tried throwing them at stuff at Exeter, it didn't really work.


Of course they are tools. The sharpened stones were tools. Real stone daggers were weapons back when they were the pinnacle of technology. Then other weapons arrived on the scene, and the daggers went back to being tools.

A stone dagger is just a spear-head supersized, they're harder to make because there's more likely to be a fault in the material that causes them to break.


It would have been an utter waste to dull the innovative daggers with the cutting of the flesh & bones - a task a sharp stone could perform even better than the fragile, brittle knife. Once again, not only a fact, but also common sense. Try to use a flint or obsidian knife to dismember an animal. I remember my mother breaking a steel knife wrestling with a chicken bone - imagine what would happen to a Palaeolithic tool encountering a mammoth or a bison.

That's exactly what they did, there's no better use than eating in a survival situation. Flint knives are great for dismembering animals, obsidion ones are a bit tricky, the damn things are so sharp you'll slice the carcas to ribbons, and your fingers, if you're not careful.

[Furunculus]

and we are still a little OT for the given subject of boy-scouts and their pen knives. :)

[Furunculus]

good article -

How is a Boy Scout to Be Prepared without his trusty penknife?:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/6151078/How-is-a-Boy-Scout-to-Be-Prepared-without-his-trusty-penknife.html

[Andres]

Scouts to no longer bring penknives on camping trips


Really...

:wall:

:bigcry:

When you finally think you just have had the summum of nonsense, they invent something else.