Contraband at Cadet Activities

[coudano]

Sorry dp'd from another forum but I thought it is relevant over here too...
Sort of spun off from the other thread... but more generally speaking:

Why do we list contraband items for CAP events?
How do you enforce contraband rules?
What do you do with contraband items when they are found?
What do you do with the person who had the contraband?
What sorts of things are on contraband lists for CAP cadet activities?
What types of CAP events do we need to enforce contraband rules at (and which ones don't)?
Who has the authority to determine what is contraband and enforce it? Where do they get that authority?
Any other pertinent questions or comments on this topic?

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Most of what is considered as contraband is listed in our regulations, other than that they come from the host wing and activity commander. Listing the items makes it easier to say that everyone attending knows what should left at home, it also makes it easier as less time is needed to check for the contraband. When contraband is found it is confiscated until the end of the activity, depending on what the contraband is, say a pocket knife... hold it until the activity is done. Now for something like drugs, they would be confiscated the cadet moved to a safe area away from the rest of the cadets and the parents of the cadet would be called, also any other actions that need to be performed IAW regulations. Contraband rules should be enforced at all events, don't pick and choose, it is a matter of safety.

[addo1]

I will do my best to share my thoughts on this issue.

1) Contraband, or forbidden items, are forbidden for a reason. We have a list of items to "not bring" because many people will bring whatever item it may be if we do not tell them not to.
2) Enforcement is obviously situational, but if agreements are signed for the activity, etc, then a violation of contraband can be considered a breach of integrity.
3) If contraband has been kept and found, I have seen everything from a long talking to with the cadet to an immediate dismissal.
4) Listing "sorts" of things for CAP activities is broad because it will depend on the activity. For example, I would have knives and all weapons on a list of contraband for a leadership/encampment type school, but certain knives would be acceptable in one of my field training schools.
5) There are certain items which are mandated contraband (drugs, alcohol, tobacco, weapons, etc), but everything above regulation-forbidden and illicit items are at the discretion of the activity commander. If the commander wants to make an item contraband, then that would be his or her decision. As to where the authority comes from, well, the term commander has its perks.

So, to sum up the above... Contraband is a general term until the activity is defined so specifics can be made. Once something is decided as contraband, the staff should enforce it.

[Eclipse]

Why do we list contraband items for CAP events?
To insure items which are unsafe, illegal, inappropriate, or disruptive are not brought into the training environment.

How do you enforce contraband rules?
Prior notice, entrance inspections, daily inspections.

What do you do with contraband items when they are found?
Items found upon arrival which are not either illegal or a violation of CAP regs are inventoried and stored in a secured
location.  Cadets acknowledge their receipt upon their return.
Note: This isn't just "bad" stuff - cell phones, money, car keys, and even non-CAP reading material are generally considered
contraband and stored on arrival.

What do you do with the person who had the contraband?
In most cases, nothing, if they are caught on arrival or they are standard items that are just inappropriate during the activity.

Contraband that shows up during the activity may just have been missed, or might have been hidden - the former is no big deal,
the latter may be anything from a conversation with the commander to a ride home depending on the severity and the attitude.

Anything illegal such as a firearm, illegal drugs, etc., will be an immediate bad day for everyone involved.  We have a no-tolerance
policy that invokes the police immediately and lets them deal with the parents.  Any cadet who would show up to an encampment
with a gun or drugs needs an immediate high-velocity course correction.

What sorts of things are on contraband lists for CAP cadet activities?
- Reading material (other than CAP Manuals, etc) 
- Radio, CD / MP3 player, video games, etc.
- Cameras.
- Cell Phones (during the event) 
- Candy, gum, or food of any nature. 
- Lighters or other ignition sources
(the below is a go-home ticket)
-   Adult or pornographic materials   
-   Alcoholic beverages of any sort, tobacco products of
any nature, illegal drugs or substances, knives or
weapons of any nature, and any other items that would
detract from each day's planned activities.

What types of CAP events do we need to enforce contraband rules at (and which ones don't)?
I'd say anything with an overnight component for sure, especially if the cadets are afforded any unsupervised free time.
Encampments, NCSA's, NCC, and similar should be a given, but I would say a wing conference could have more risk
for "badness" because of poor supervision and the cadets are still in the "real" world.

Who has the authority to determine what is contraband and enforce it? Where do they get that authority?
The activity commander. In the case of an encampment the authority comes directly form the wing CC, for other
activities the authority is part and parcel of the chain of command.

[ol'fido]

Baggage checks should be part of any inprocessing procedure. Also, a few things that may be contraband for basic cadets at encampments may be allowed for cadet staff. Speaking from many years of checking bags at encampments, I have found that most cadets who show up at with contraband do so not trying to sneak it in but they have received inaccurate or poor guidance from persons at their home unit. A prime example of this is cigarette lighters or matches brought to burn wayward threads off uniforms or a pair of 12" tailors shears as part of a sewing kit. The cadets are not trying to "get over", they just don't have a clear understanding of what's contraband. These things I can deal with.

Sometimes cadets will show up with items that aren't really listed as contraband but leave you scratching your head. Things like tennis rackets, golf clubs, ironing boards, etc. Sometimes cadets hear the word "encampment" and the only part of that word that registers is "camp". And so they show up with sleeping bags, tents, and other survival gear. One cadet showed up with a flare gun and flares. We could probably start a whole thread on some of the goofy stuff brought to encampment.

Then lastly, you have those cadets who do bring in cantraband knowingly. One year at Volk Field , two cadets were sharing a shampoo bottle full of vodka. They were rolling it back and forth to each other across the aisle of their open bay barracks late one night. Apparently, they failed to notice the TAC  doing a nightly walk through and the bottle hit him in the foot. The cadets got a free trip to the SkyCop building and a trip home after that.

[Ron1319]

I remember that Ohio Wing used to feel it had the right to take car keys from adult cadets.  I recall not agreeing with that and insisting that I had a right to drive away if I decided I was leaving.  Holding a 20 year old against their will seems like an illegal concept to me.

[Eclipse]

I remember that Ohio Wing used to feel it had the right to take car keys from adult cadets.  I recall not agreeing with that and insisting that I had a right to drive away if I decided I was leaving.  Holding a 20 year old against their will seems like an illegal concept to me.

There is no such thing, in a CAP context, as an "adult cadet", pick one.  Adult or cadet.

And as long as you are a cadet, you do not have the same rights of self-supervision in a CAP context as an adult.
If you want the opportunities without the responsibility, that is the price.

No one is holding you against your will (or at least shouldn't be) - anyone who wants to leave an encampment should be free to do so at any time, under-18 cadets included.  But don't expect credit or to be invited back if you can't play by reasonable rules.

[arajca]

I remember that Ohio Wing used to feel it had the right to take car keys from adult cadets.  I recall not agreeing with that and insisting that I had a right to drive away if I decided I was leaving.  Holding a 20 year old against their will seems like an illegal concept to me.

1. The operative word here is CADET.

2. They do have that right. Cadets, regardless of their age, can be required to turn in the keys to their vehicles they drove to CAP activities.

3. If you decide you were leaving, all you had to do is go to whoever is holding the keys, sign out of the activity and leave. No one would be holding you there. Of course, doing so without a good reason would probably result in not being allowed to come back.

4. It comes down to accountability. Considering this discussion is about contraband, how easy would it be for an 18+ yo cadet to simply keep the contraband in their car and get it whenever they felt like by keeping the keys. Also, what would happen if you decided at 0300 you wanted to leave. Without holding the keys, the staff (who is still responsible for you at the activity) would not know you left until you failed to show up for morning pt/formation/inspection/whatever.

[FARRIER]

I remember that Ohio Wing used to feel it had the right to take car keys from adult cadets.  I recall not agreeing with that and insisting that I had a right to drive away if I decided I was leaving.  Holding a 20 year old against their will seems like an illegal concept to me.

No disrespect intended, but even as a former cadet, I've always thought it odd for someone to stay a cadet until they turned 21. The age of 18 is supposed to be (or used to be) that transitional age into adulthood. We have the Flight Officer grades for this age group.

[Ron1319]

Perhaps we need Ned to chime in here.  Based on my loose understanding of the world, if an 18 year old cadet wants to leave an activity at 3am and go home, or go get in trouble with the law, I'm in no way legally responsible, nor is CAP.  We can extend that to smoking in his car if he wants.  Bad, but not my legal problem in any way I can imagine.  If they're 16 on the other hand, then I'd think we'd be open to legal action.  Therefore, and I'm open to being corrected, I place them in different categories.

Further, when I have 18, 19 and 20 year old phase IV cadets under my command, they'll have the respect and autonomy they deserve unless they prove they cannot be trusted.  Unless someone can tell me it's not ok for some reason.  In short, they should be able to drop me a text message, say that they had an emergency at work, and go.  At 20 as a c/Col in North Carolina, I was working full time at IBM as a very well paid intern.  My commanders trusted me entirely and would never have questioned my decision to leave.

On the topic of staying a cadet after 18, you, my friend have an entirely different view of the cadet program than I do.  A 17 year old typically can't think about strategic planning (cadet growth, recruiting, meeting schedules that are involving and smart) the same way that a 20 year old can.  I'll take a 20 year old c/Col as cadet commander of a 60 cadet squadron any day over a 17 year old c/CMSgt (which appears to be the norm).  My expectations for the squadron and the cadet staff would be much, much greater and my own involvement would be quiet advisory rather than having to step in and directly influence.

Your senior cadets will always respond better to the c/Col than the 19 year old FO and the growth of the c/Col and opportunities will be much better in my experience.  Not in a world where they are treated like 12 year olds, however. 

As only one example, the 19 year old FO will never be in a position where they regularly report to the national commander, but the national CAC chair does.  The other simple analysis is that the FO is at the bottom of the food chain.  It's not in my personality to make a decision to go from the absolute top of the food change (ranking cadet in the wing where the wing commander calls you asking for advice) compared to a FO grade that I've never really even seen used, much less would even really have a good place for.

I don't think this goes very far towards determining what is considered contraband and I'd like to see the list.  I remember lots of cadets who carried a zippo.  Is that really not allowed now?  You can put me in the misinformed category.  I believe it's our safety officer's opinion that you teach people to use safe but risky things safely, not keep them away from them.

Better yet, how do you want to be respected if you consistently show a lack of trust?

So we're clear, I'm not talking about allowing things that are illegal.  Just not creating an environment where an 18 year old cadet feels they're being treated like a 12 year old and therefore they would rather go drink with their college buddies than mentor the next generation of cadets.

[arajca]

To decide what's contraband, you need to know what the activity is. Most folks here are touching on general items or encampment. A leatherman may be contraband at an encampment, but not at a GSAR school.

Regarding vehicle keys:

e. Vehicles. Cadets who drive privately-owned vehicles (POVs) to a NCSA will not operate the POV during the activity and will turn in all car keys to the designated senior member upon arrival.

and

(2) Cadets who drive POVs to encampments will not operate the POV while at the encampment. Upon arrival, they will turn-in all car keys to the designated senior member, who will return the keys when cadets are dismissed.

You may not have a legal responsibility for 18+yo cadets, but you have a CAP regulatory responsibility.

Here's a good one for you:
13 yo cadet from COWG shows up at an encampment in another wing with a bag of pot. He has a prescription for it, but the encampment is in a non-medical pot state. Contraband or prescription medication?

[EMT-83]

Speaking as a 50 year-old dad with a teenage son, how do I put this in plain language?  Kids do stupid stuff. Someone needs to be responsible to keep the stupid behavior in check.

As discussed in other threads, it's darn near impossible to create and enforce age-related rules for cadets that everyone thinks are fair. Some teens are incredibly mature, others incredibly scary.

For the record, at age 20 I was married and working for a defense contractor. A know-it-all kid working in final inspection on radar components used on bombers and cruise missiles. Now that's scary!

[Ron1319]

Pot's still federally illegal and I'd consider it contraband at any event, prescription or not. 

I'm hoping to get a 1st person story of Ohio Wing abusing taking keys away but I'll post the story if my sister doesn't accept my bribe to post it herself.  The regs are for encampments and national special activities.  Ok.

I have a story about a fellow cadet who fell asleep at the wheel driving home after encampment was over and nearly killed himself.  I doubt there are enough rules to make the cadet get enough sleep before driving.  At some point we just have to conclude that he was, in fact, an idiot.  And I say that because I knew him for years and he was.

[Ron1319]

Let's not lose track of the fact the my point is that a lot of seniors treat cadets like 12 year olds.  If we do that, they will go do something else instead, and they're the single best recipient of tasks we want to delegate.  My goal in CAP (as in my business) is to personally do as little as possible.  You do that by empowering the enthusiastic.

[Ned]

The regs are for encampments and national special activities.  Ok.

True enough, the regs quoted above seem specific to encampment.

But they suggest that it is a good leadership practice to forbid cadets to drive during a CAP activity, and it also seems like a good idea to limit their access to the vehicle for some of the reasons mentioned here.

There are at least several reasons for this.  Although we all hope that cadets would never have an accident while operating a vehcile during a CAP activity, it seems sort of inevitable that such a thing will occur from time to time if cadets are permitted to drive.  When that accident occurs, it raises issues concerning supervision and CAP liability that can simply be avoided if cadets are forbidden to drive.  Obviously some of the same issues arise when seniors are involved in accidents, but the difference arises in the supervision requirements of our cadet members.

And there are obvious practical difficulties in supervising cadets when they are off driving somewhere.

As you suggested in your earlier post, CAP has no inherent authority to forcibly detain someone who has reached the local age of majority (usually - but not always -18).  Any adult who wants to leave an activity can simply sign out and go.  And can certainly do so even at 0300.  But that is an entirely separate issue as to whether or not cadets can be required to surrender their keys.

I have a story about a fellow cadet who fell asleep at the wheel driving home after encampment was over and nearly killed himself.  I doubt there are enough rules to make the cadet get enough sleep before driving.  At some point we just have to conclude that he was, in fact, an idiot.  And I say that because I knew him for years and he was.

Non-concur.  I think we have to take reasonable steps to ensure that drivers have had enough "crew rest" before departing an activity.  Commanders / activity directors should always structure activities to make sure enough down/sleep time is built into the schedule.  And if we know that a cadet driver has had insufficient sleep, we should make alternate arrangements and not simply wish them luck as they climb into the car.

In the Army, we called this making a sleep plan.  It's just basic good leadership.

Pot's still federally illegal and I'd consider it contraband at any event, prescription or not.

A tough call for the local commander.  Our job is to follow the law.  In rare situations, as here, laws can conflict.  Ultimately the commander will have to make the decision.

[Ron1319]

Merry Christmas to all, by the way, and good evening, Ned.  My point wasn't intended to mean that we shouldn't schedule the down time, it was more that the cadet had time to sleep and chose not to.  The general idea being we can make all of the rules we want.  If we're petty about them and in a way disrespectful, they're going to just go around the rules.  In that case the rules are good, but someone can just not follow them anyway.  Seriously, he almost killed himself.  Rolled a convertible.

Meanwhile, how about this specific example?  18 year old cadet, who by the way drives a Mercedes SUV, wants to go get a sandwich during a 9am-6pm training academy day for lunch.  I say, "You're an adult you can go get a sandwich if everything here is taken care of and we know where you're going."  I'm 99% sure that he can sign in and out or not but I don't think we're accepting liability for an ADULT when they're signed in, are we?  It'd be like saying that I was liable for one of my employees while they went on lunch break because they were at work.  Not my understanding of how the world works.

I suppose the question, Ned, is can we require an adult cadet to turn over their keys?  Obviously they can just go home and not come to the activity, but that's again not really the goal.

[a2capt]

Heh, wow. A 13 year old with a pot card. Now he must envy of certain other kids I bet. Just wonderful. DDR, but I have a pot card.

[caphornbuckle]

It holds true to the RM life.  Since the cadet program is molded around RM life, it would be simple to see that trainees (cadets in this instance) would be restricted in their movements during the training period (the entire week).

I know I was put on lockdown during periods of training numerous times during my service.

If one wants to be a cadet, one will be treated like a cadet.  Otherwise, become a Senior Member.

[Ned]

Seriously, he almost killed himself.  Rolled a convertible.

Sadly, he would not be the only example.  We have had cadets killed driving home from activities when lack of sleep was suspected to be the cause.  That's why scheduled down time for drivers is so important.

Meanwhile, how about this specific example?  18 year old cadet, who by the way drives a Mercedes SUV, wants to go get a sandwich during a 9am-6pm training academy day for lunch.  I say, "You're an adult you can go get a sandwich if everything here is taken care of and we know where you're going."  I'm 99% sure that he can sign in and out or not but I don't think we're accepting liability for an ADULT when they're signed in, are we?

Except for encampments (where we have a specific regulation on point), whether adult cadets can "check in/out" of an activity is up to the activity commander.  If you're the boss, I suspect the cadets will be able to do so.  I'm guessing if Eclipse was the activity commander, the cadets will be staying put.  My job as a staff guy is to support commanders' in the lawful exercise of  their discretion.

I suppose the question, Ned, is can we require an adult cadet to turn over their keys?  Obviously they can just go home and not come to the activity, but that's again not really the goal.

The answer is clearly "yes."  We can and do require adults to wear uniforms, not smoke or drink in front of cadets, work certain hours and at certain locations, and yes, turn in their keys if they want to play in our sandbox.  If they don't want to play, they can just go home.

And in the case of encampments, we publish the rule ahead of time so that no one will be surprised  when they show up.  That's probably a good rule for every activity.

[Slim]

Regarding cadets (or senior members for that matter) driving to/from activities:

b. Use of POVs for transportation to and from CAP meetings, encampments and other activities is solely at the risk of the individual CAP members and their passengers. CAP assumes no right of control, liability or responsibility for such transportation.

Why that's buried in the reg covering operation and maintenance of corporate vehicles is beyond me.  Maybe it should also be included in the 52-16?

That seems pretty cut-and dried to me.  If you want to drive to encampment, an NCSA, or even a squadron meeting, you're on your own.  CAP has stated that I don't have any responsibility, liability or control over what happens to you after you sign out of the activity and drive out the main gate.

OTOH, does that relief us of our duty as leaders to make sure that drivers are well rested prior to setting out for home at the end of an NCSA or encampment?  I think we'd all agree that the obvious answer is "Of course not."

The regs are also pretty cut and dried regarding cadets turning in car keys at the start of an NCSA or encampment.  If you're going to throw that much of a fit over turning in your car keys, I'd kinda have to wonder what your plans are or what you have stashed in the car. 

[Ron1319]

So now you're saying that if I'm 19 years old and you've taken my keys and I want to leave that you have the right to detain me?  I'm pretty sure that's kidnapping.  Now the problem is that I'm 19 and I generally want to follow orders.  I at this point could call the police and they would tell you that you have to give me my keys, but you're already abusing your power and I'm now some form of intimidated.  You've now scared me away from calling the police and you're holding me against my will.  How would *that* look in court?  How would that look sitting in front of the wing commander?  We have a problem if those two answers are different.

Remember we're not talking about a 13 year old or even a 16 year old.  We're talking about a 19 year old with his own apartment, job and car. 

[Ron1319]

Which does bring up the question -- why aren't 18-21 year old cadets formally in a different classification?  I'm almost positive that with the cadet protection requirement and common sense that they have to fall under the same insurance as seniors and not as the 12-17 year olds. 

Note that I lived in the dorms on campus at 17 and started interning at 18.  At the point at which someone no longer lives with their parents, they're pretty much responsible for their own decisions. 

Please look at the thread and consider why so many cadets leave CAP when they turn 18.  I have employees that are 18 and I have cadets that are 18.  I treat both like responsible adults.  If they're not and they're my employees, I fire them.  I'd essentially would do the same with the cadets, but fortunately they're all fantastic and will make great Spaatz cadets some day.

[a2capt]

Perhaps the topic of Cadets 18 and over and POVs is better served separately, 

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=11945.msg218790#msg218790

So those who have more fun contraband stories to share .. can

[Ned]

So now you're saying that if I'm 19 years old and you've taken my keys and I want to leave that you have the right to detain me?

No, that's the exact opposite of what I said.

I said:

As you suggested in your earlier post, CAP has no inherent authority to forcibly detain someone who has reached the local age of majority (usually - but not always -18).  Any adult who wants to leave an activity can simply sign out and go.  And can certainly do so even at 0300.

See?  I never said you could be detained against your will as an adult cadet.

I'm pretty sure that's kidnapping. 

Nope.  Kidnapping requires that I move you some significant distance against your will.  You're probably thinking of "false imprisonment."  And this isn't that either.

Now the problem is that I'm 19 and I generally want to follow orders.  I at this point could call the police and they would tell you that you have to give me my keys, but you're already abusing your power and I'm now some form of intimidated.  You've now scared me away from calling the police and you're holding me against my will.  How would *that* look in court? 

That would look exactly like if you called the police at 0300 and told them that the bank "stole your money" because they won't send somebody over the the branch to open it up in the middle of the night to let you make a withdrawal.

IOW, not very compelling for the cops.  Nor is it a crime of any sort.  You want to leave, leave.  Walk out the gate.  Call a cab, grab a space-A hop, whatever.  If you want your keys, you're gonna have to wait until business hours tomorrow and sign out of encampment like everyone else.  We're probably going to make sure you have returned all of the government and CAP property you have signed for; like radios, linen, dorm keys, etc.  I'll be happy to return your keys then.  I really have no interest in keeping your car.  If you left without it, it would actually be a fairly large pain-in-the-butt for me to clear post for the activity.

Remember we're not talking about a 13 year old or even a 16 year old.  We're talking about a 19 year old with his own apartment, job and car.

Yeah, I got that part.  Did you get the part where I said you could leave at any time?

[Ned]

Which does bring up the question -- why aren't 18-21 year old cadets formally in a different classification?  I'm almost positive that with the cadet protection requirement and common sense that they have to fall under the same insurance as seniors and not as the 12-17 year olds. 

What insurance are you talking about?  We don't have any insurance that will pay for losses incurred if one member abuses another, regardless of the ages of the participants.

We do require 18 year old cadets to take CPPT (in February they can do that at age 17), and adult cadets have different requirements for medical permissions, etc, based on their majority.

But as I'm sure you would agree, the concepts of "adulthood" and "cadethood" are simply unrelated.  Apples and oranges.  A "cadet" by definition is simply a military student, usually training to be an officer.  An "adult" is simply someone who has obtained the local age of majority, usually (but not always) 18.  Uncle Sam has cadets ranging in age from roughly 14 to nearly 30 years of age. 

Note that I lived in the dorms on campus at 17 and started interning at 18.  At the point at which someone no longer lives with their parents, they're pretty much responsible for their own decisions. 

Please look at the thread and consider why so many cadets leave CAP when they turn 18.

Actually, the overwhelming number of cadets leave CAP well before their 18th birthday.  I don't have my figures handy, but IIRC correctly the number of 18+ cadets is a small proportion of our program, less than 10%.  I think we do some of our best work with our 18+ troops, but they are a relatively small minority.

[ol'fido]

Also, the number of 17+ year old cadets that show up as basics at an encampment are relatively small. The usual 17,18,19, etc year old cadet is showing up as a staff member and has experienced or observed the common practices at encampments. They are not going into this blind. They are usually well aware that car keys are collected at the beginning of the activity and returned on the last day. Having attended or worked at nearly 20 encampments over the years, I have never known this to problem. We have had cadets leave early either for disciplinary reasons or because of family emergencies. They are usually outprocessed and released from the activity with little problem or fanfare.

[Ron1319]

I think I misread something pertaining to the post on detaining cadets.  I thought I'd read someone saying that we shouldn't let them leave if we thought they didn't have enough sleep.  Your post, Ned, was very clear that we were trying to make other arrangements.  I agree completely that we need to ensure down time and be sure we don't schedule them to get 3 hours sleep then drive away.  I have a specific example in mind and I'm still hoping I can get the first person version in the thread.

Actually, the overwhelming number of cadets leave CAP well before their 18th birthday.  I don't have my figures handy, but IIRC correctly the number of 18+ cadets is a small proportion of our program, less than 10%.  I think we do some of our best work with our 18+ troops, but they are a relatively small minority.

I would agree that WE do our best with the 18+ cadets, but the attitude that cadets should all be treated the same in this and other threads is probably WHY.  We should look further there, however I agree we've strayed from the contraband topic.   They certainly don't have to be 18 to no longer want to be treated like 12 year olds. 

[Ron1319]

And I would assume that CAP has some kind of liability insurance?

[Ned]

And I would assume that CAP has some kind of liability insurance?

Of course we do.  But our policy doesn't cover every possible source of liability; there are some exemptions.

For instance, we do not have any medical malpractice ('errors and omissions") insurance because it is too darn expensive.  As in hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.  That's one of the reasons that CAP HSOs cannot give routine medical treatment.

And we are not covered for losses related to abuse of one member by another.  Because such insurance is not available at any price.  In practice, that means we are "self-insured" for this hazard. 

And oddly enough, we don't have any insurance for damages committed by a cadet who is driving a vehicle.  I suspect that that would be prohibitively expensive as well.  Insurance companies' experience has been that insuring young drivers is a high risk endeavor and either refuse to cover such activity or simply charge outrageous premiums.

[Ron1319]

Cool, so now we're getting somewhere useful

Would a cadet signing in and out of a CAP activity at 19 years old have any weight in court?  In other words, 19 year old cadet leaves the hotel where wing conference is at 3am for any reason and gets in an accident.  He was "signed in" but they're an adult, right?  How could I or CAP be liable for them?

If there is a legal issue there then I would consider you an expert and would really like to understand that.

[Ned]

Would a cadet signing in and out of a CAP activity at 19 years old have any weight in court?  In other words, 19 year old cadet leaves the hotel where wing conference is at 3am for any reason and gets in an accident.  He was "signed in" but they're an adult, right?  How could I or CAP be liable for them?

This is one of those instances where the law is easy, but the facts will be tricky.

As a general rule, CAP is not liable for what members do when not acting on behalf of CAP, unless CAP somehow negligently contributed to the act.

The reverse is also true; CAP is generaly liable for what members do when acting in the course and scope of their CAP duties.

So, IF our hypothetical 19 year-old cadet has left the activity with no intent on returning (and thus is acting on their own and not under the control of CAP nor as part of their CAP duties), then generally CAP is not going to be liable.

Predictably, what is going to happen is that the other party is going to try to prove that the cadet WAS on CAP duty or under the control of CAP at the time in order to show that we are liable.  Because they are going after the "deep pocket" of CAP, Inc, in addition to the rather shallow pockets of the typical 19 year-old.

Questions are going to revolve around whether or not the troop was signed in or not.  How do you prove that?  What was the troop doing?  (Heading off to an all night WallMart to get some supplies for a seminar tomorow, getting some food because CAP made her/him work during the dinner hour, headed home with no thought of returning?  All have different implications.)

Even if the troop was acting outside the course and scope of their CAP duties, CAP may have liability if we negligently contributed to the accident.  Was the cadet allowed to drink alcohol by a senior member who looked the other way?  Did we fail to provided adequate rest time in a way that virtually ensured that the cadet would be sleep-deprived when she/he left at 0300?  Did we fail to exercise adequate supervision to ensure that the cadet knew that he/she was forbidden to leave the conference?  Did we know that this particular cadet disobeyed orders in similar situations in the past and failed to take corrective action?  Did we even know the troop was gone?

So to answer your question directly - "How could I or CAP be liable?", the answer is "it depends."   

Ned Lee
Former CAP Legal Officer

[Ron1319]

So how about a specific example extrapolated.  Can I let a 19 year old cadet leave a daytime training activity (10a-6p) to go get lunch?  Does being "signed in" have any legal implication?  I always have assumed it's just for participation letters and wouldn't mean anything to a judge.  How about getting food for everyone?  How about stopping to get supplies at Walmart?  Does it change if I'm in the passenger seat.

Now the real question --  is it any different than if I went to go do the same thing and had an accident?  If not, then it doesn't really matter, does it?

And what's this about cadets drinking?  Cadets don't drink?!  :angel: 

[Ned]

Can I let a 19 year old cadet leave a daytime training activity (10a-6p) to go get lunch?

Maybe.  Assuming you are the AD / commander, you are responsible for supervising cadets at all times.  There is no rule that says you have to have line of sight on every cadet at every moment.  Reasonable supervision will vary according to the activity in question and the cadet's age and experience.

Thiink of it this way.  Some high school students are 18.  Are the rules any different for them at your local high school?  In my exerience, generally not.  I've never heard of a high school where only the 18 year-olds can leave for lunch.  I've heard of closed campuses where no one can leace for lunch (even the 18 year olds), and I have heard of schools where seniors can leave, but not juniors or below.

High school students are generally treated as high school students, even if some of them are 18.  The 18 year olds still need to be supervised on field trips and after-school activities.  A staff member always has to be present, and 18 year old high school students do not get to be the supervisors of the under 18 students.

Does being "signed in" have any legal implication? 

Depends on the question being asked.  If the question is whether the member is acting in the course and scope of their CAP duties, it could well be very important.  That's one reason why we make such a point of knowing who is present at each activity.

How about getting food for everyone?  How about stopping to get supplies at Walmart?

If someone is performing CAP duties, then CAP may be liable for their actions.  It will always be a question of fact as to whether "getting lunch" or "supplies" is in the course and scope of a member's duties.

Does it change if I'm in the passenger seat.

It might.  If you are directly supervising a cadet who is driving while performing CAP duties and the cadet collides with something, then that could get very expensive, very quickly because CAP does not have insurance that covers cadets who are driving vehciles.  Which is why cadets cannot drive CAP vehicles.  As the immediate supervisor, any negligence on your part (like letting a cadet drive on CAP duties) could result in corporate and personal liability.

Now the real question --  is it any different than if I went to go do the same thing and had an accident?  If not, then it doesn't really matter, does it?

I think I lost you here.  If you have a vehicle accident in your POV, you and your insurance company while normally figure out who owes who money. 

The difference between you and a cadet is like the difference between a high school student and a teacher.

Bottom line, it is normally a very bad idea to allow cadets to drive at or during CAP activities.

[Ron1319]

Now the real question --  is it any different than if I went to go do the same thing and had an accident?  If not, then it doesn't really matter, does it?

I think I lost you here.  If you have a vehicle accident in your POV, you and your insurance company while normally figure out who owes who money. 

The difference between you and a cadet is like the difference between a high school student and a teacher.

Bottom line, it is normally a very bad idea to allow cadets to drive at or during CAP activities.

I would think that legally (in court) we would both be adults driving a car during a CAP activity.  Why would the person suing have any different of a case if it was me or a 19 year old cadet?  Would a judge (presumably knowing nothing of CAP or caring about the cadet program at all) see any difference about there being one adult driving a car or another?

I don't see how school law applies to CAP, a volunteer corporate organization.  I'd think the question would have the same answer as "if I am in the passenger seat and one of my employees is driving and we're going to get supplies for my business, am I liable for their accident?"  I think the answer is no, but I went to engineering school, now law school

[Ned]

I'd think the question would have the same answer as "if I am in the passenger seat and one of my employees is driving and we're going to get supplies for my business, am I liable for their accident?"  I think the answer is no, but I went to engineering school, now law school

Ahh, I see the disconnect.

I really hate to use Latin here, but the answer you are looking for is the doctrine of Respondeat Superior , which says that, yes, generally bosses and corporations are indeed liable for the acts of their employees, when those acts are committed in the course and scope of their employment.

(And the doctrine applies withing volunteer organizations as well, subject to a few defenses.)

Does that make sense?

[Ron1319]

OK.  But I'm no more in charge of CAP than the cadet, right?  In other words, I own my business but not CAP. 

That again brings me back to the question about whether there's any legal difference between me and the cadet in terms of one of us getting in an accident during an activity.  It seems we're woefully lacking when it comes to insurance.  I wouldn't expect it for minors but I would expect that from an insurance standpoint they would consider adults equally, but I guess not? 

I actually did the thing that people who are doing ES training kind of laugh about from time to time as a thing that just would never happen.  As a cadet, I was the GTL and drove my own vehicle on a mission with a senior member as a GTM.  It was just the two of us in my car.  I think my deputy commander of cadets who was the MC (now IC) sent us out more because he knew he could get us out quickly and perhaps a bit because it was novel than anything else.  I'd trust me at 20 as a GTL with a LOT of mission experience.  I'm not seeing how CAP would be more liable than if I did the same thing, now.

Again, from my perspective we're not bickering, I feel that I really need to know these answers.  Not exactly things that are covered in cadet protection training.

[arajca]

I think your best bet would be to schedule some time with YOUR wing legal officer to answer these questions. Some of the answers will depend on the particular laws in your state.

[Ron1319]

Ned's in California, and I'd imagine if he doesn't know he'll say so, or help find the answers.  Further, it seems to me like everyone should want to know the answers to these questions since I can't be the only one with these questions.  The regs don't have the answers.  I don't know why the regs aren't more clear about "If a cadet leaves a CAP activity they are no longer performing CAP duties and CAP is no longer responsible for their actions," unless it wouldn't be viable?

Ron

[Ned]

That again brings me back to the question about whether there's any legal difference between me and the cadet in terms of one of us getting in an accident during an activity.

Yes.  There are several important differences.  Of course, there are always going to be problems after an accident, and many would apply equally to a senior and a cadet, but some are unique to cadet status.

Statistically, the great majority of accidents are minor fender-benders without injury.  I suspect that in such situations, from the perspective of the non-member driver/owner, there is not going to be much difference in the outcome depending on the membership status of the driver.  (Within CAP, there are almost always consequences.)  If the negligent actions of a CAP member caused damages to a third party, we are generally going to be liable for the damages.

The real problems begin to arise in collisions that result in severe injuries or extensive property damage.  That is when lawyers typically get involved and begin to look for every possible source of compensation for their clients.  And lawyers will look for the deepest pockets, which in the context of our discussion is going to be CAP, Inc.  A multimillion dollar quasi-governmental corporation with hundreds of million dollars of assets.

And every lawyer knows that larger settlements occur in cases where the injuries look very bad requiring lots of future care, and the negligence of the other side (CAP) looks as bad as possible.

Like having inexperienced drivers (cadets, by definition) who are supposed to be closely supervised (again, cadets by definition) engaged in activities where innocent people can be hurt or killed (driving to lunch on a highway).  It is even worse if it looks like we are violating specific rules put in place to promote safety.  ("Isn't it true that all cadets are required by your own regulations to turn in their keys for the duration of your so-called encampment?")

If cadets are supposed to be supervised, and an unsupervised cadet does something that causes damages to somebody else, it is essentially negligence per se on our part, even if the cadet's actions were arguably not negligent in the first place.

Although I know you don't like it, the school analogy is apt.  If the school district let an 18 year-old high school student drive a district vehicle and it was involved in a accident, it is a significantly different situation than when the custodian does so. 

Again, from my perspective we're not bickering, I feel that I really need to know these answers.  Not exactly things that are covered in cadet protection training.

To be fair, all you really need to know is that it is a bad idea to let cadets drive during a CAP activity because of liability reasons.  A full understanding of the legal background couldn't hurt, and it certainly isn't classified information, but there is already more stuff to teach than we really have time for in Level 1, SLS, CLC, etc. 

And the message "don't let cadets drive at activities" seems well distributed and accepted by CP officers and commanders.  I don't see this issue very often at the national level.

But I have been anxious to expand cadet protection training beyond the hazards of sexual abuse and hazing, so let me add this to the list.

[Ron1319]

How about the opposite approach?  How about creating an "adult cadet" category for cadets over the age of 18 with different supervisory requirements?  State officially that cadets over the age of 18 do not have the same requirement for supervision that minor cadets do, that they do not have to turn in their keys at encampments and NSCA's and that they are no longer participating in the CAP activity when they leave the event.  Clearly state that they are not able to supervise minor cadets the same as a senior officer, but that they themselves are adults and under their own care as their status as adults would warrant.  Wouldn't that alleviate much of the legal issue and create less liability for CAP, Inc?  It seems like it's the way it is because that's the way it's always been, and that our own rules and over-control of adult cadets is causing much of the problem.

So we're clear to anyone who hasn't read my other posts, I believe that 70%+ of what I got out of CAP and  as a cadet came after the age of 18.  To those who say that we should not have cadets over the age of 18, I gasp every time I read that.  My brain kind of shudders a bit.  Creating a different category for them, however, would also perhaps open up other 18+ opportunities that would potentially help with retention after 18.  I can't think of many examples at the moment, but I'm sure we could come up with some.  Heck, give them a little adult-badge.

If there's nothing legally preventing it, it helps with retention, and alleviates liability, I'd think the national board would jump on it.  The only counterarguments come from cadets abusing it somehow, but I can't think of downsides that outweigh the potential upsides.

I'm on board with not letting cadets drive at CAP activities.  I'll be extremely careful about it in the future.  Car accidents are particularly a sensitive subject for me as I've been recovering for well over a year now from a bad accident where I was stopped and a Civic-driver who wasn't paying attention forgot where the brake pedal was.  A typical surface-street speed on a major road here in California is 50 mph with a posted 45 mph speed limit, for those who think of non-highway accidents happening at <25 mph impact speed.  Getting hit by someone doing 50 mph hurts for over a year, I've learned.

Ron

[DakRadz]

How about the opposite approach?  How about creating an "adult cadet" category for cadets over the age of 18 with different supervisory requirements?

In all seriousness- for those who want this status, we have Flight Officers, and there's even a chance for promotion...

[Ned]

How about creating an "adult cadet" category for cadets over the age of 18 with different supervisory requirements?  ( . . .)  Wouldn't that alleviate much of the legal issue and create less liability for CAP, Inc?  It seems like it's the way it is because that's the way it's always been, and that our own rules and over-control of adult cadets is causing much of the problem.

I get regular briefings on current litigation, mishaps, and investigations.  And I just got done with my tour as the National Cadet Advisor with pretty good access to these kinds of issues in the administrative chain.

And I don't see the current situation as an issue.  Indeed, it seems kind of successful to me.  We don't have lots of lawsuits, complaints or issues.

I hear your assertion that we have an "over-control" issue with our older cadets and you believe that this is affecting retention.  That is certainly reasonable.

But my experience doesn't support it.  I understand we are looking at different pieces of a rather large pie, and maybe I'm just missing the groundswell of concern being expressed by the 18+ crowd.  But the NCAC hasn't brought this forward.  Nor am I hearing this from the field.

Obviously you may well be correct, but it would help to develop some sort of data to support the position.  We can and should make changes to program as necessary to improve it.  And I can only agree that we should not be unnecessarily restrictive when we don't have to be.

[Ron1319]

How about the opposite approach?  How about creating an "adult cadet" category for cadets over the age of 18 with different supervisory requirements?

In all seriousness- for those who want this status, we have Flight Officers, and there's even a chance for promotion...

I'm a Captain and going to be a Major as soon as the time in grade time passes.  I'd like to state again that I think I should get credit for my time in grade as a Captain in 2000 and 2001, but whatever.  I'm 100% positive that I have nowhere near the ability to influence the cadet program now that I did as a 20 year old c/Col, and can't forsee having that ability in the near future.  I can provide support for my unit and the group and hope to grow c/Col's who will have that opportunity to influence the program, but I wouldn't be able to give them that support on the same level without having been in that position.  To have given up that experience for FO grade would have sacrificed a lot with no upside that I can see, at least none that couldn't be remedied by some fairly minor seeming rule changes.

Meanwhile, Ned, your response is excellent.  I'll continue to observe and try to provide specific current examples.  What I do know (for sure) is that my unit commander said that they had not previously had cadets who were 18+ because they didn't have experience with them, didn't really know what they would do and basically it hadn't been encouraged.  I realize that's a different context than this discussion, but even easier to fix by anyone reading this who is in a command position through discussions with the right people.  If anyone else has some specific current examples, I'd love to hear about them, especially from cadet officers.

[Al Sayre]

How about the opposite approach?  How about creating an "adult cadet" category for cadets over the age of 18 with different supervisory requirements?

In all seriousness- for those who want this status, we have Flight Officers, and there's even a chance for promotion...

One of the problems with that is that an 18-19 Yr old Cadet Officer who is still in High School becomes simply a Senior Member and can't be promoted to any FO grade until they finish HS per CAPR 35-5 Sect 1.6.  I have a couple of 18 yr old cadets in that situation in my squadron.

[DakRadz]

How about the opposite approach?  How about creating an "adult cadet" category for cadets over the age of 18 with different supervisory requirements?

In all seriousness- for those who want this status, we have Flight Officers, and there's even a chance for promotion...

One of the problems with that is that an 18-19 Yr old Cadet Officer who is still in High School becomes simply a Senior Member and can't be promoted to any FO grade until they finish HS per CAPR 35-5 Sect 1.6.  I have a couple of 18 yr old cadets in that situation in my squadron.

Oh... Because of the diploma/GED requirement for SMs?

[Al Sayre]

Yep

[Cool Mace]

If anyone else has some specific current examples, I'd love to hear about them, especially from cadet officers.
[/quote]

It's funny you bring this up. My DCC and I have been talking a lot about this kind of stuff.

We were talking about cadets that turn 18 will move to a type (for lack of better words) of Sr. status, but hold the cadet rank so they will be able to to go for their Spaatz. When at activities, they will be treated as Sr.'s would, but with the same positions as cadets. Why? Look at CPP. How am I (a cadet that will be 20 in two months) any different the the 45 year old Sr. over there when it comes to CPP? Say I want to go take a shower at encampment. Well if there's a 14 year old flight sergeant in there, I'm sure as hell not going yet. Why? CPP again. All he has to do is I said or looked at him weird, and I'm done for. Doesn't matter if I'm a cadet or not. I would much rather shower with the 45, 50 or whatever Sr. just so I don't have to worry about stuff like that.

Also, there's a big difference when it comes to 14 year old staff, and 18 + cadets.

So why not end the CP at 18? I've learned way too much after I've turned 18 in the CP. Stuff I couldn't learn as a Sr. Like last summers encampment. I was the C/CC, and I learned more from that then from anything else I've done in CAP.
I wouldn't have been able to do that if I turned Sr. at 18.

Just my 2 cents.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

If anyone else has some specific current examples, I'd love to hear about them, especially from cadet officers.

It's funny you bring this up. My DCC and I have been talking a lot about this kind of stuff.

We were talking about cadets that turn 18 will move to a type (for lack of better words) of Sr. status, but hold the cadet rank so they will be able to to go for their Spaatz. When at activities, they will be treated as Sr.'s would, but with the same positions as cadets. Why? Look at CPP. How am I (a cadet that will be 20 in two months) any different the the 45 year old Sr. over there when it comes to CPP? Say I want to go take a shower at encampment. Well if there's a 14 year old flight sergeant in there, I'm sure as hell not going yet. Why? CPP again. All he has to do is I said or looked at him weird, and I'm done for. Doesn't matter if I'm a cadet or not. I would much rather shower with the 45, 50 or whatever Sr. just so I don't have to worry about stuff like that.

Also, there's a big difference when it comes to 14 year old staff, and 18 + cadets.

So why not end the CP at 18? I've learned way too much after I've turned 18 in the CP. Stuff I couldn't learn as a Sr. Like last summers encampment. I was the C/CC, and I learned more from that then from anything else I've done in CAP.
I wouldn't have been able to do that if I turned Sr. at 18.

Just my 2 cents.
[/quote]
I do kind of agree, once CPP enters into your training, your kinda done with being a cadet all the way.

[Ron1319]

Treated as a senior in what ways?

[a2capt]

The next one of you to quote, should count the tags.

[Cool Mace]

Treated as a senior in what ways?

(counted the tags )

Follow the the Sr. program as far as tracks go... Besides the ones cadets can already do, ES, safety, ect...
But still be able to work on achievments such as going for their Spaatz.

I don't personally don't like sharing a bay (such as at encampment) with staff that's 14, 15 years old. Why? a few reasons, one being CPP. Also? There's a big difference in age compared to a 14 y/o and a 18, 19 and 20 y/o cadet.
How they act, things they talk about (granted cadets and Sr.'s alike should always watch what they talk about, just saying, ya know?). I don't even like changing from PT to BDU's to Blues, or whatever with them around. I know nothing will happen, but I'm still a legal adult no matter being a cadet or not.

[Eclipse]

Sorry - you're either a cadet or a senior - you don't get to be a "maxi-cadet" or a "mini-senior" and drink from both troughs.

I think cutting off cadets at 18, especially without some relaxation of the current time-between-grades, would basically end the
Spaatz program.  It might be interesting to see how many Spaatz cadets achieved the award between 18 & 21, but certainly
in my personal experience the lion's share has been over 18.

I would, however, be in favor of some increased real responsibility for older cadets, in allowing them to self-supervise and
supervise other cadets, but that is a mine-field of unnecessary potential liability.  For every mature 18 year old, there are
10 who still act 15.

I reject the notion that this is even an issue outside discussion forums.  The older cadets I deal with regularly "get it" and move on.

[Ron1319]

Yes, but they're already not the ones who are the problem.  They're already older cadets.  They already have senior support that respects them and encourages them to continue to grow and probably also have role models who are 18+ cadets.  Did we lose 3x as many for whom it was a problem but did not have a forum in which to address their problems? 

I can only come up with a list of three cadets over 18 in this group and they're all in my squadron and have turned 18 since we've rejoined and influenced the squadron.  I'm not saying that there has to be regulation change to effect change in this area, but I'm 99% sure that something was broken here and is fundamentally not quite perfect when it comes to the regulations. 

Thinking back, I did get to be a lot more like a "mini-senior" for a fairly long time. 

[wacapgh]

If anyone else has some specific current examples, I'd love to hear about them, especially from cadet officers.

It's funny you bring this up. My DCC and I have been talking a lot about this kind of stuff.

We were talking about cadets that turn 18 will move to a type (for lack of better words) of Sr. status, but hold the cadet rank so they will be able to to go for their Spaatz. When at activities, they will be treated as Sr.'s would, but with the same positions as cadets.

There was something like that back in the 70's - Senior Memeber Transition Program (SMTP). It didn't last too long, so I'm not 100% on the details, but it was basically like you describe. 18+ year old cadets could work on the next milestone after transitioning (ex. if you had your Earhart you could try for your Spaatz), and could participate in NCSA's (I think - as a 15 year old cadet at the time, I really didn't bother learning the details that well  ). I believe they wore Warrant Officer rank insignia (not the brass C/WO but bars and blocks), and generally participated as Senior Members. It wasn't popular, I can think of only one cadet who opted for it, and it went away after a couple of years.

[BillB]

It went away because is was voluntary. To many cadets wanted to keep their high cadet rank and status symbol. If it had been manditory to change to the transition program it would have been successful. It still allowed the SMTP (among other names for the program) people to progress in the cadet program (more than one milestone) while performing senior duties and training. It also recognized that 18+ members were adults and thus could have more activities available that are restricted to those below age 18. The grade insignia was the standard military warrent officer grade. A sivler bar with stripes running across (not lengthwise). Since USAF had dropped the warrent officer program the standard USAF warrent officer insignia was used.
This program is brought back would resolve many of the problems caused by or faced by the 18-21 year old member.

[Ned]

This program is brought back would resolve many of the problems caused by or faced by the 18-21 year old member.

1.  There are no problems faced by 18-21 year old cadets that such a program would "help."  IOW, it is a solution desperately seeking a problem.

2.  If the program has died for lack of participation at least twice before (counting both the "Advanced Cadet Transition" program (ACT) and the "Senior Transition Program" (STP) flavors), why do you think it would work this time?  Isn't one of the definitions of insanity "doing the same thing repeatedly but expecting different results."?

3.  Any program that seeks to forcibly deprive cadets of some or all of the benefits of our outstanding cadet program is by definition harmful to our program.  And that's a Bad Thing, is it not?

[Nathan]

Cutting off at 18 is a bad idea. The Spaatz can theoretically be earned in 4 years, but even so, most of the people I've seen rush through the program to try to reach the Spaatz in that amount of time miss out on quite a bit. When you go from being a C/SSgt during one encampment to being a C/2d Lt the next, you aren't likely to have much of an NCO encampment experience. It's just not a feasible option.