New CPP Codified - Updated 52-10

[abdsp51]

And just for completeness sake......military regs don't carry force of law.....but yes.

Ah but they do, they carry the force of the UCMJ found in the Manual for Court Martial.  Plus they have in big bold letters, "COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY"

[lordmonar]

And just for completeness sake......military regs don't carry force of law.....but yes.

Ah but they do, they carry the force of the UCMJ found in the Manual for Court Martial.  Plus they have in big bold letters, "COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY"

Yes....but the law makes it a crime for military people to ignore those regs......not the regs.  If a reg defines a "cadet" as "a tall, slightly blue, angular weather vane"........it is not law....it is just a regulation.

I know it is a quibble here....but like I said....for completeness sake.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Here's a situation, found out there's a cadet who has two working parents. Can't bring him to meetings, but are able to pick up. A SM lives within a mile of said cadet. Parents and SM met, discussed, and have had the SM drive the cadet to meetings. There's no other SMs/Cadets who live in the area to carpool said cadet. When the SM wasn't able to attend, neither was this cadet. Under the reg, what can the unit do to keep the cadet in the program?

[arajca]

If the SM is using their POV, there is no problem with 1 on 1 as that trip is not covered by CAP under the to/from work rule. If it's in a CAP vehicle, totally different story.

As for keeping the cadet in the program, how many meetings are they missing? One in a while? One a month? Every other meeting? If a cadet cannot get tot he meetings, it is not the unit's responsibility to provide transportation. It is nice if they can, or help arrange it, but ultimately, it is up to the cadet and their parents to arrange for transportation.

[lordmonar]

Yes you are right....it is an arbitrary NHQ policy.

But it is consistent.

Cadets and SM can't date...no matter what their ages.

Cadet MP's can't fly with another cadet on board.

Cadets with Driver's licenses can drive golf cards (when approved) but not with any other cadets on board.

Age has nothing to do with it.  Proficiency has nothing to do with it.  The law has nothing to do with it.  Only their status as a "cadet".

There is nothing really "new" with this CPP.   The frame work has been there for a long time.   You are free to voice your concerns through the chain of command to get any "problems" you see fixed.

[Eclipse]

A SM may not drive a cadet to a meeting alone.

The regs are clear.

A reg about transport does not negate a reg about cadet protection.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Right, so what do we do? I don't think the parents permission, unfortunately, covers it.

[NIN]

Unfortunately I think the cadet is out of luck.

I hear that all the time: " oh, mom and dad are okay with it. " when I moved here in 1998 the squadron commander of the local unit asked me to give a cadet a ride home. I refused, citing CPP. I was told I did not know what I was talking about. Apparently his interpretation of the CPP was different then my old unit and wing.

He tried the same thing: " his mom is okay with it "

" yeah, parents are always okay with it. Right up until they discover that you are abusing their kid. Then suddenly they are not. How about we avoid the whole thing by following the rules in the first place? "

I got a little bit of a rep as the new guy who seems to follow the rules. Funny how that works

[Майор Хаткевич]

Yep, heard the story a few tines before. Any thoughts on how to address this? Past experience?

[Eclipse]

+1 As currently written, there's no allowance for any waivers or special permissions.

"Mom and dad are OK" Now.  If something unfortunate comes up, their lawyer will
be waiving the regs and the Unit's awareness could be viewed as complicity.

In addition to any monetary damages assessed against CAP, there would likely be a lot of ex-members,
especially considered how bright the lines are in this regard.

[Майор Хаткевич]

That we're clear on. Now how do we keep this kid in the program?

[THRAWN]

A SM may not drive a cadet to a meeting alone.

The regs are clear.

A reg about transport does not negate a reg about cadet protection.

That is just blasted idiotic. Great example of over-regulation in an attempt to avoid the appearance of improper behavior. If Captain Pervystache is intent on doing immoral things with Cadet Puresnow, rules like this aren't a deterrent.

[Майор Хаткевич]

A SM may not drive a cadet to a meeting alone.

The regs are clear.

A reg about transport does not negate a reg about cadet protection.

That is just blasted idiotic. Great example of over-regulation in an attempt to avoid the appearance of improper behavior. If Captain Pervystache is intent on doing immoral things with Cadet Puresnow, rules like this aren't a deterrent.

That's not true. If he has no chance to do it on CAP time, good for CAP! If we do our part, and educate (as now required) ALL cadets on what is appropriate and what is not, Pervystache won't have an easy go of it outside of CAP with that cadet either.

[a2capt]

That we're clear on. Now how do we keep this kid in the program?

Recruit a second cadet from his neighborhood .. pick up both of them at the same stop. Have a parent with a cadet inbound pick up said cadet. Have said cadet take public transit to a point where another inbound cadet/parent combination can pick them up, that isn't out of the way.

[Eclipse]

A SM may not drive a cadet to a meeting alone.

The regs are clear.

A reg about transport does not negate a reg about cadet protection.

That is just blasted idiotic. Great example of over-regulation in an attempt to avoid the appearance of improper behavior. If Captain Pervystache is intent on doing immoral things with Cadet Puresnow, rules like this aren't a deterrent.

Seriously?

CAP has a rule that says a senior member may not be left alone with a cadet, requires 2-up leadership with a gender bias
on overnight activities, and requires 3-up for any driving during activities, but being alone with a cadet to and from a meeting
sounds like a good idea?

Have you read or seen the materials on grooming?

Yes, offenders intent on doing harm will try and find other ways, that doesn't mean CAP should look the other way for expediency or convenience.

Good luck with a civil judge and jury , too -

"Yes, the rules were clear, and they were both in uniform, but this other unrelated reg gave us a loophole, so we went for it."

[THRAWN]

That we're clear on. Now how do we keep this kid in the program?

Recruit a second cadet from his neighborhood .. pick up both of them at the same stop. Have a parent with a cadet inbound pick up said cadet. Have said cadet take public transit to a point where another inbound cadet/parent combination can pick them up, that isn't out of the way.

Not always practical or possible. I know of places not too far from where I'm standing that the nearest neighbors are a few miles distant, and public trans doesn't exist. I know of other places just as close where it is unsafe to ride public trans after a certain time of the day.

This is a tough question. I, like I'm sure many here, have given rides to cadets. I knew and still do know their parents, have spent family weekends together and if little Johhny needed a ride, I'd give him one. Having to leave the program over lack of a ride? The more time I spend in this organization, the more I wonder just how it survived this long...

[Grumpy]

Well, you know, nobody wants to work any more.  They just file frivolous law suits and the judges instead of saying it's got no merit and throwing it out allows it.  Then they allow these ridiculous penalties like the gal that was awarded a million dollars for spilling her hot coffee in her own lap because the coffee was too hot.  Duh, what do you think lady, it's coffee.  "Caution, hot coffee might be hot"

Nobody wants to accept responsibility for the stupid things they do to themselves.  Sue somebody else, it's their fault I Base jumped off a cliff using an umbrella as a parachute and it didn't work or I ignored the flashing alarms and stepped in front of a train.

Nope, only way to solve this CPPT problem is to dump the entire program.  Then you don't have to worry about interpreting the reg anymore.  Yeah, that's da answer.

End rant.

[Eclipse]

This is a tough question. I, like I'm sure many here, have given rides to cadets. I knew and still do know their parents, have spent family weekends together and if little Johhny needed a ride, I'd give him one. Having to leave the program over lack of a ride? The more time I spend in this organization, the more I wonder just how it survived this long...

I bet most of us have, however it is what it is. 

How did getting Johnny to the meeting become "not his parent's problem?" Nor should the attitude be "blaming CAP" for trying to protect this cadet (and itself).

A lot of things would be "nice" or "convenient" that simply aren't - absent the random membership of another senior in the area,
this cadet isn't getting a ride anyway.

I agree the rules should have an allowance for things like "dad supervising his daughter on overnights" and "parents allowing 1-up rides", but the
latter is a potential minefield, so you can see why CAP doesn't want to entertain the idea.

[Eclipse]

Well, you know, nobody wants to work any more.  They just file frivolous law suits and the judges instead of saying it's got no merit and throwing it out allows it.  Then they allow these ridiculous penalties like the gal that was awarded a million dollars for spilling her hot coffee in her own lap because the coffee was too hot.  Duh, what do you think lady, it's coffee.  "Caution, hot coffee might be hot"

I agree wholeheartedly that Tort Reform is needed in this country, and I use the "Coffee Lady" example myself as a handy reference,
but to be fair to the facts, when you read the details of the case, McD's response and record of past injuries, as well as their response to
settlement offers, the issues aren't as black and white as the media has made it out to be.

[Майор Хаткевич]

That we're clear on. Now how do we keep this kid in the program?

Recruit a second cadet from his neighborhood .. pick up both of them at the same stop. Have a parent with a cadet inbound pick up said cadet. Have said cadet take public transit to a point where another inbound cadet/parent combination can pick them up, that isn't out of the way.

Certainly something to look into, but as stated, a month from now, there won't be any cadets from that direction available.