Paint Ball for Cadets

[WT]

Everyone's OK with it UNTIL someone gets hurt.  Then, someone causes and investigation and everyone gets in trouble.  That's why the Regs are there, folks!

[caprr275]

One thing most people are forgetting is that you're a CAP cadet or senior member anytime your on the roster.  If you are out with friends who happen to be in cap and you do something that is against regs you are BREAKING a reg.

The excuse that its not a "official" even or that "your not in uniform" doesn't work, you volunteered to join and follow the regs. You can not just say well im not a volunteer right now or chose what regs to follow or not.

I was once told if there are 2 or more people from CAP together at any time then it can be considered a CAP event and you MUST follow the regs.  People will always do what they want to however that does not make it correct any way you justify it in your mind!

[jimmydeanno]

One thing most people are forgetting is that you're a CAP cadet or senior member anytime your on the roster.  If you are out with friends who happen to be in cap and you do something that is against regs you are BREAKING a reg.

Uhhh...no.

With that logic I could never carry a gun.

I could never paintball on my own time or with friends.

etc, etc.

I do think that there is a difference between "grabbing a couple friends and going paintballing" and "the squadron members happening to show up at the paintball range at the same time as everyone else."

[Stonewall]

One thing most people are forgetting is that you're a CAP cadet or senior member anytime your on the roster.  If you are out with friends who happen to be in cap and you do something that is against regs you are BREAKING a reg.

The excuse that its not a "official" even or that "your not in uniform" doesn't work, you volunteered to join and follow the regs. You can not just say well im not a volunteer right now or chose what regs to follow or not.

In a way, what he is saying makes sense in other areas of CAP as well.  "I'm not on duty with CAP so I can do what I want and not get in trouble".  Makes sense.  But if you were not on "duty" with CAP and performed a positive action, let's say you saved a life, you would expect a Life Saving Medal.  Take the bad with the good?

Just spitballin' here.  

[JoeTomasone]

One thing most people are forgetting is that you're a CAP cadet or senior member anytime your on the roster.  If you are out with friends who happen to be in cap and you do something that is against regs you are BREAKING a reg.

The excuse that its not a "official" even or that "your not in uniform" doesn't work, you volunteered to join and follow the regs. You can not just say well im not a volunteer right now or chose what regs to follow or not.

I was once told if there are 2 or more people from CAP together at any time then it can be considered a CAP event and you MUST follow the regs.  People will always do what they want to however that does not make it correct any way you justify it in your mind!

I disagree strongly; while you are always a member while on the MML, you are not always participating in the program.   The regs suggest this in many places -- signing out from a mission, wearing the uniform up to an hour after an activity, etc.  

What makes a CAP event a CAP event is someone in command (or their designee) saying that it is (or, as I mentioned earlier, making it one through actions normally associated with one).  

By your logic, any time 2 or more cadets are in the same classroom at school then it's a CAP activity.   If I recruit 3 co-workers then suddenly my workday becomes a CAP activity (where it wasn't before).    If you are a teacher, and you recruit some of your students, then it's a CAP activity (and since you are then participating in the Cadet program, you need to wear your uniform).   If you are a police officer and work with another CAP member, then you just violated regs by bringing your weapon to a CAP activity.

Obviously, this is not the case.

Just as I am always an employee of my company but am not always at work; so to I am a CAP member but not always acting as one.  

Of course, should I do something illegal while not at a CAP activity, CAP can always hold me accountable for that - but to say that the regs apply when you're not at a CAP activity or acting on behalf of CAP (such as when I do my paperwork) is crazy.   Should the CAP members whose child is a cadet refer to them as "Cadet" at the dinner table?!

[chiles]

CAPR 52-16

1-4. Safety Policies Related To The Cadet Program

     c. Weapons. There will be no firearms, air guns, paint guns or any device that could be used as a weapon at any cadet activity.

Talk about your overly broad and conflicting reg!   My immediate thought when I saw this was "OK, so all  Ground Team members need to lose their knife"... 

Taken to the extreme..... I can see some overzealous Reg-inator outlawing tent stakes, stake hammers, shovels, screwdrivers, etc, etc... 

I think that the ES equipment issue isn't an issue on ES missions and exercises because they are not a cadet activity. They are ES activities that cadets are at. The wording is fine.

[davidsinn]

CAPR 52-16

1-4. Safety Policies Related To The Cadet Program

     c. Weapons. There will be no firearms, air guns, paint guns or any device that could be used as a weapon at any cadet activity.

Talk about your overly broad and conflicting reg!   My immediate thought when I saw this was "OK, so all  Ground Team members need to lose their knife"... 

Taken to the extreme..... I can see some overzealous Reg-inator outlawing tent stakes, stake hammers, shovels, screwdrivers, etc, etc... 

I think that the ES equipment issue isn't an issue on ES missions and exercises because they are not a cadet activity. They are ES activities that cadets are at. The wording is fine.

So I can't bring a knife to cut my cake at the Christmas party tomorrow? That's a pretty stupidly worded reg. Good intent, very poor implementation.

[chiles]

Have one of the party-goers get lost on the way and then go find them, instant ES mission. 

[jimmydeanno]

^

Common sense will prevail.  If it is so specific that it lists the "prohibited items" someone will bring something and say "well it didn't say I could bring a block of C-4 to the meeting..."

[JoeTomasone]

I think that the ES equipment issue isn't an issue on ES missions and exercises because they are not a cadet activity. They are ES activities that cadets are at. The wording is fine.

I think I can argue that it's considered a cadet activity for purposes of 52-16.  Here are the subheadings for that section:

1-4. Safety Policies Related To The Cadet Program.
a. Training in Hot Environments.
b. Mission Activity.
c. Weapons. (the section in question)
d. Parachuting & Ultralight Vehicles.
e. Rappelling.
f. Obstacle/Confidence Courses.
g. Transportation.
h. Respect for Others.

Seems to me that they are equally valid and both apply to the Cadet Safety question... 

[chiles]

Fair point. Not a whole lot about being a CP Officer that's easy, is there.

[arajca]

I disagree. Based on your logic, ANY activity that a cadet is present at would be a cadet activity. ES missions etc, are activites cadets are involved with, not cadet activities.

I think that the ES equipment issue isn't an issue on ES missions and exercises because they are not a cadet activity. They are ES activities that cadets are at. The wording is fine.

I think I can argue that it's considered a cadet activity for purposes of 52-16.  Here are the subheadings for that section:

1-4. Safety Policies Related To The Cadet Program.
a. Training in Hot Environments.
b. Mission Activity.
c. Weapons. (the section in question)
d. Parachuting & Ultralight Vehicles.
e. Rappelling.
f. Obstacle/Confidence Courses.
g. Transportation.
h. Respect for Others.

Seems to me that they are equally valid and both apply to the Cadet Safety question... 

[JoeTomasone]

I disagree. Based on your logic, ANY activity that a cadet is present at would be a cadet activity. ES missions etc, are activites cadets are involved with, not cadet activities.

Read what I said again:

I think I can argue that it's considered a cadet activity for purposes of 52-16. 

[Timbo]

Paintball is both a physically good activity and a fun activity.  NHQ needs to look into allowing SQD's to participate in Paintball activities.  HOWEVER......however, until the regulations are changed, don't be a sly fox and try to get around them.  Do the right thing here.  By reading some of you posts, there are some fellow members that need to start sitting in on moral leadership seminars, and reread their oath they took when joining.

JUST DON'T DO IT.  You do it, you may or may or may not get caught, but our Cadets do know how to read, and comprehend things........that means they are comprehending that it is OK to break the rules when you do it in such a way that it turns the situation into a "can't tell if its wrong" situation. 

So we start running around the regulation wording for paintball the next thing we know we have 4 dead Cadets because they all took off in the Squadron built aeroglider helicopter that was assembled with Radioshack parts as part of the Aerospace education mission. 

I may have confused some of you........in short, I am very disappointed in many here that are trying to sculpt scenarios to try to break the rules we agreed to uphold. 

I did not think I would find that here at CAPTALK.   

[Climbnsink]

Not picking on any particular argument but some folks here read the regs in the most restrictive sense possible.  What's that bit in the Constitution about all things not mentioned are OK.  If we follow the logic of some everything is a CAP activity.  I have gone flying not in uniform in a friend's plane from the same airport at the time as a CAP meeting.  Oh and I met this friend through CAP.  Someone going to tell me I should have been in uniform because that was a CAP flight/activity.  Lighten up Francis.

[Timbo]

Not picking on any particular argument but some folks here read the regs in the most restrictive sense possible.  What's that bit in the Constitution about all things not mentioned are OK.  If we follow the logic of some everything is a CAP activity.  I have gone flying not in uniform in a friend's plane from the same airport at the time as a CAP meeting.  Oh and I met this friend through CAP.  Someone going to tell me I should have been in uniform because that was a CAP flight/activity.  Lighten up Francis.

Come on now.......common sense.  Respectfully since I don't know you, I don't think the US Constitution has a bearing on the "if its not written its allowed argument in CAP.

WE all have a sense of judgement and can decide what is and what is not a CAP activity.  Having your SQD all show up in civilian clothes at the paintball range the night of the CAP meeting and not signing in is NOT going to get around the regulations good enough.  You will be fired (maybe asked to leave).   

[JoeTomasone]

Not picking on any particular argument but some folks here read the regs in the most restrictive sense possible.  What's that bit in the Constitution about all things not mentioned are OK. 

May I suggest a re-read of the Constitution?   Powers not granted through the Constitution are left to the States or to the People. (Amendment X)    Murder, for example, is not mentioned in the Constitution, but it is surely not OK -- State law prohibits it.

Regardless, regulations - like laws - are not always written to precisely capture the author's intent - or simply fail to account for all possible circumstances or new technologies, etc.    We should be prepared to follow the intent or the letter of the regulation based on a common sense interpretation.

With respect to paint ball and the weapons restrictions in 52-16, I do not believe that paint ball would actually be covered -- if you see the intent as preventing injury or accident.   However -- the person judging this is not me -- it's the Commander/IG/whomever -- and you are counting on THEIR interpretation.  They may conclude that paintball poses too much of a risk (paintball in the eye, etc) to be a "safe" cadet activity.    And again, if you ask me, inviting your cadets to play paintball -- especially if done via the Sq. meeting or email list, etc -- is tantamount to making it a CAP activity.  

So if you want to do this, my advice is to go through channels and get the approval of the Wing Commander to either approve it as a CAP activity or to agree that it will NOT be a CAP activity.    That way, you're covered.   If you get turned down, then you have a good idea how an investigation would have gone if it had ever come to that.

[Timbo]

^+1 

[Eclipse]

Not picking on any particular argument but some folks here read the regs in the most restrictive sense possible.  What's that bit in the Constitution about all things not mentioned are OK.  If we follow the logic of some everything is a CAP activity.  I have gone flying not in uniform in a friend's plane from the same airport at the time as a CAP meeting.  Oh and I met this friend through CAP.  Someone going to tell me I should have been in uniform because that was a CAP flight/activity.  Lighten up Francis.

Your logic above fails for at least three reasons.

First, the standards and regs for senior members are different from cadets.  52-16 is a regulation which cover the execution of the Cadet Program.  I would not be at all uncomfortable meeting up with other senior members (i.e. adults) on my own time, out of uniform, for anything I felt like doing.  As adults, we are personally responsible for our own behavior.  Not so when you involve cadets, where the adults in the room are responsible for their safety.

Next, you may wish to familiarize yourself with the way paramilitary organizations are run, especially in terms of their published regulations.  The only thing you may do, is what is explicitly authorized.  All other options are prohibited, and generally the only time a specific behavior is prohibited is when there has been a problem in the past where a commander's liberal interpretation of a respective regulation has caused a problem.

Third, trying to invoke some purported "right" from the U.S. Constitution is irrelevant, as members of CAP who wish to stay members of CAP must obey the CAP Constitution.  In this case, CAP, Inc, cannot tell Mr. Climbsink he is prohibited from paintball, but it absolutely can tell Lt. Climbsink he isn't even allowed to think about it, on CAP time or otherwise.  Lt. Climbsink is then free to vote with his feet and leave, or comply and stay.

[Climbnsink]

My bad, I wasn't paying enough attention to the details.  I have no problem with CAP saying paintball isn't a viable activity for Cadets.  But the notion that friends from CAP can't go paintballing on their own time I find silly.