A CAP/BSA Venturing Squadron with Deuce-and-a-Half. Help, please.

[Eagle400]

I know of a CAP/BSA Venturing Squadron that has a Deuce-and-a-Half, ten years after losing the same exact type of vehicle.  The loss of the vehicle was a result of the group commander becoming aware of its use by the squadron, and subsequently administering appropriate disciplinary action to those responsible for keeping it at the squadron and using it to transport cadets and seniors.

I was going to begin this thread with even more detailed background information than I have already given, but I think the photos pretty much speak for themselves:





The welcome sign greets you.



The squadron exit is immediately on the right.



The comm. shack is straight ahead.



The squadron entrance becomes visible.



The supply shed directly across from the entrance is hiding something.



And upon reaching the other side of the supply shed, a 2 ½ ton truck becomes visible.


At a different angle, you can see the squadron entrance sign in plain view from the Deuce-and-a-Half.



(Zoomed In)



(Zoomed Out)



I have a problem with this, because CAPR 52-16, paragraph 6-2, item (e) states the following:

A jointly chartered CAP Venturing Crew or Varsity Team will conduct all operations and activities under CAP regulations or clearly and unmistakably conduct itself under the auspices of the scouting program only. If the unit wishes to conduct any activity outside of, or restricted by CAP regulations, the unit commander will obtain Scout liability insurance protection for CAP and the members of the unit from the Scouting Council or Scouting National Headquarters before proceeding.

As far as I know, this Venturing Crew at the squadron has chosen to conduct all operations and activities under CAP regulations.  This group is in the form of a military youth cadet program, similar to the CAP Cadet Program.

Here are the links to the websites of both the squadron involved and the Boy Scout Venturing group jointly chartered with it:

Camarillo Composite Squadron 61

Ventura Military Explorers (website has old address)


What options are available in preventing this Boy Scout group from continuing to use this unauthorized vehicle for CAP activities and defy CAP regulations?

[lordmonar]

And you need help why?

[jpnelson82]

sniff sniff, I'm envious that looks like a CAP equivalent of a military base  like Ft. Lewis

[FW]

CCSE,  This truck does not belong to CAP.  It either belongs to some other organization or individual.  That it is parked at a CAP Sq. is not an issue.  It is not an issue if CAP cadets are transported in it.  AS LONG AS THE VEHICLE IS PROPERLY INSURED, properly inspected and has seat belts for the passengers, it shouldn't be anyone's concern.  
If the above weren't true.  I think the gp/cc or wing/cc would have taken issue with this along time ago.

BTW; nice pictures.

[♠SARKID♠]

CAPR 77-1 states that CAP can't own a deuce and a half.  If the vehicle is owned by a separate person or organization (i.e the BSA) then its CAP legal.

[jimmydeanno]

Wow, that's some fancy investigation.  If you were to take pictures like that at my squadron you'd see a CAP sign, a sign on the door and about 10 deuce and a halfs parked in our parking lot.  Doesn't mean we have anything to do with them.

"News of the force reports that CAP squadron shares facilities with other organization that has a deuce and a half.  Call for segregated parking lots leads to discrimination lawsuit."

[davidsinn]

BSA units can't own vehicles. They can't even own trailers.

[MIKE]

Don't feed the troll.

[Eagle400]

If the above weren't true.  I think the gp/cc or wing/cc would have taken issue with this along time ago.

Oh, but the GP/CC did. 

Not only that, but he also had the vehicle confiscated as well.

CCSE,  This truck does not belong to CAP.  It either belongs to some other organization or individual.  That it is parked at a CAP Sq. is not an issue.  It is not an issue if CAP cadets are transported in it.  AS LONG AS THE VEHICLE IS PROPERLY INSURED, properly inspected and has seat belts for the passengers, it shouldn't be anyone's concern.

I refer you to CAPR 52-16, paragraph 6-2, item (c):

A jointly chartered CAP Venturing Crew or Varsity Team will conduct all operations and activities under CAP regulations or clearly and unmistakably conduct itself under the auspices of the scouting program only. If the unit wishes to conduct any activity outside of, or restricted by CAP regulations, the unit commander will obtain Scout liability insurance protection for CAP and the members of the unit from the Scouting Council or Scouting National Headquarters before proceeding.

As far as I know, this BSA Venturing Crew conducts all of its operations and activities under CAP regulations.

I also refer you to CAPR 77-1, paragraph 1, item (d):

Types of vehicles not permitted to be owned by CAP will be determined by NHQ. Vehicles not permitted to be owned by CAP include, but are not limited to:

1) Buses
2) Water trailers
3) Humvees
4) Deuce and half (2 1/2 ton vehicles or larger)
5) Boats
6) ATVs 

So one must ask, if the Deuce and a Half is not the property of CAP, then why is it parked at the squadron and not at the home of the person it is registered to?

Also, if I am wrong about this Boy Scout group and it turns out that they do unmistakably conduct their group under the auspices of the scouting program only, then they are still in violation of regulations (specifically, the BSA regulations regarding BSA units and vehicles).

[Pylon]

So one must ask, if the Deuce and a Half is not the property of CAP, then why is it parked at the squadron and not at the home of the person it is registered to?

Frankly, if it's registered & insured, and CAP doesn't own it - what's the issue?

If I own a vehicle and register it, pay for the insurance and let CAP use it and leave it parked next to our CAP buildings, that's just fine.  Nothing illegal going on there.

[FW]

So one must ask, if the Deuce and a Half is not the property of CAP, then why is it parked at the squadron and not at the home of the person it is registered to?

Also, if I am wrong about this Boy Scout group and it turns out that they do unmistakably conduct their group under the auspices of the scouting program only, then they are still in violation of regulations (specifically, the BSA regulations regarding BSA units and vehicles).

1.  Not our problem
2.  Definitely not our problem.  We don't control who owns someone else's stuff.  We only control the stuff we own.  Life is complicated enough.

[cnitas]

Do I win a prize if I can take a photo of a C-130 with a CAP sign in the background?
Perhaps a Ferrari or Harley with a CAP sign in the background.  That would be cool.

This sounds like a neat contest to me.

[davedove]

Do I win a prize if I can take a photo of a C-130 with a CAP sign in the background?
Perhaps a Ferrari or Harley with a CAP sign in the background.  That would be cool.

This sounds like a neat contest to me.

You've got to make it interesting.  The photo with the most different prohibited vehicles wins the contest:

1) Buses
2) Water trailers
3) Humvees
4) Deuce and half (2 1/2 ton vehicles or larger)
5) Boats
6) ATVs

So, a photo that contained all six of these would be the winner.

Pictures also showing mounted cadets with their search dogs and mountain climbing gear would get bonus points.

[Pylon]

You've got to make it interesting.  The photo with the most different prohibited vehicles wins the contest:

1) Buses
2) Water trailers
3) Humvees
4) Deuce and half (2 1/2 ton vehicles or larger)
5) Boats
6) ATVs

So, a photo that contained all six of these would be the winner.

But you can win the Grand Prize only if cadets in BDUs with shoulder cords, wearing boonies and orange ascots, and holding paintball guns while wearing temporary grade are also in the picture.   

[mikeylikey]

^ Haha.....

MIKE......now would be the time to throw your lock in the ring.   

[Eagle400]

Frankly, if it's registered & insured, and CAP doesn't own it - what's the issue?

Whether it is owned by CAP or not, using it for activities within a CAP/BSA squadron whereby the BSA unit conducts all of its operations and activities under CAP regulations is not allowed.

BSA regulations also prohibit ownership of any type of vehicle by any Venturing post.  Even trailers are not allowed.

If I own a vehicle and register it, pay for the insurance and let CAP use it and leave it parked next to our CAP buildings, that's just fine.

This is true, so long as the vehicle is authorized for use by CAP as outlined in CAPR 77-1.  According to this regulation, Deuce and a Halfs don't qualify.

Nothing illegal going on there.

I never said or implied there was, sir.  The focus of this thread is on the regulations regarding CAP vehicles/vehicles being used to transport CAP members, and not legality.

I can think of at least 100 things that are prohibited by CAP regulations, but not illegal.

[Pylon]

The reg says CAP can't own them.  It doesn't prohibit CAP from using buses, deuce and a halfs, etc.  Encampments and other activities regularly make use of buses and military vehicles for transport.  So long as somebody else owns it, it's fair game.   If CAP doesn't own them (which I'd be pretty sure they don't - it would be red flags all over) then no regulation is being violated - whether you're CAP, or joint BSA operating under CAP rules.

[DADx11]

CAPR 77-1 is referring specifically to vehicles not to be owned by cap.

As others here have said, so long as its properly registered, licensed and insured by the individual who owns it - its not an issue.

Maybe you need a new hobby    ...

[♠SARKID♠]

The reg says CAP can't own them.  It doesn't prohibit CAP from using buses, deuce and a halfs, etc.  Encampments and other activities regularly make use of buses and military vehicles for transport.  So long as somebody else owns it, it's fair game.   If CAP doesn't own them (which I'd be pretty sure they don't - it would be red flags all over) then no regulation is being violated - whether you're CAP, or joint BSA operating under CAP rules.

Concur.

CCSE, let me give you a case in point.  A squadron in my wing has a hovercraft at their exclusive disposal.  Its a boat-like vehicle so CAP isn't allowed to own it.  However, all they had to do was donate it to a non-profit organization that works with/sponsors their squadron.  That way, CAP doesn't own it and the squadron can still use it.  No toes are stepped on.  CAP doesn't mind us using the vehicles on that list, however they do mind paying the jacked insurance premiums on them.  If its on someone else's bill, CAP could care less.  At that point its a POV, not a COV.  If the deuce1/2 is owned by a separate party, that makes it kosher for the BSA regs too.


I have a very easy solution to this whole predicament - why don't you ask the squadron what the situation is?

[SSgt Rudin]

I only have one issue with this topic - that it's here. CAP has a fancy new program called IG, and that is where your issue should have been brought not to a publicly accessible web site. If they find there is an issue they will handle it, if there is no issue and they do nothing then you can come here and gripe about it.

[SarDragon]

I only have one issue with this topic - that it's here. CAP has a fancy new program called IG, and that is where your issue should have been brought not to a publicly accessible web site. If they find there is an issue they will handle it, if there is no issue and they do nothing then you can come here and gripe about it.

Yeah, but Smitty's not a member, so any complaint to an IG would likely get a "WTF?" response. So, he comes on here with his stir stick and agitates the nest until someons responds.

If no one responded, he wouldn't have a fun playground, would he?

YMMV.

[FW]

This is true, so long as the vehicle is authorized for use by CAP as outlined in CAPR 77-1.  According to this regulation, Deuce and a Half's don't qualify.

I never said or implied there was, sir.  The focus of this thread is on the regulations regarding CAP vehicles/vehicles being used to transport CAP members, and not legality.

I can think of at least 100 things that are prohibited by CAP regulations, but not illegal.

Is there something we are not making clear?  CAP doesn't own any buses either.  But, I find squadrons using buses to transport personnel all the time.   We can't  own airliners, but I use one to travel to CAP meetings.  And, if I could, I would have one parked near the local squadron for convenience.

If a "sponsor" loans the truck for their use, that's OK too.  I wish someone would loan me a "King Air" for my use.  Any one interested in loaning me exclusive use of a "King Air"?  

CAP does not concern itself with an explorer post breaking BSA rules; even if it is duel chartered.  Our regs are pretty clear on this.  

I think this horse is dead.  But, if you still want to swing that bat.....

[RiverAux]

CCSE, this sounds like a very local issue that would be better taken up with the group or wing staff than sounding here.  If there is something wrong going on, it sounds like they've been willing to take action in the past and presumably would now. 

[Eagle400]

Yeah, but Smitty's not a member, so any complaint to an IG would likely get a "WTF?" response.

And that is one of the problems with CAP.  CAP is not the military.  As a private, volunteer 501(c) 3 organization, all citizens have the right to voice their opinions and complaints about CAP units in their own communities, and have those voices heard.

Also, I was a member of that squadron when the Deuce and a Half was confiscated by Group.  Interestingly, the same people who were responsible for the vehicle's confiscation are now part of the squadron leadership as members of the BSA.  So not only do I have a reason to be suspicious about the use of this vehicle by the squadron, I also have BTDT experience as well.

I apologize for not making that clear earlier in this thread.

So, he comes on here with his stir stick and agitates the nest until someons responds.

If no one responded, he wouldn't have a fun playground, would he?

YMMV.

Considering I have not posted in a month, and have abstained from using my old posting style since then, your assertion is based on the assumption that I am the same way I once was.  However, this assumption is wrong.  I say this in the most polite manner I can.

It is also important to note that to anyone looking over this thread, he or she will find no language of mine that is designed to upset, annoy or cause discontent among those who read it as well as those who respond to it.

Also, you may want to know that "WT*" = circumventing the curse word filter.


Now, back to the topic.

[Eagle400]

Is there something we are not making clear?  CAP doesn't own any buses either.  But, I find squadrons using buses to transport personnel all the time.   We can't  own airliners, but I use one to travel to CAP meetings.  And, if I could, I would have one parked near the local squadron for convenience.

If a "sponsor" loans the truck for their use, that's OK too.  I wish someone would loan me a "King Air" for my use.  Any one interested in loaning me exclusive use of a "King Air"? 

Okay, then a mistake has been made in the interpretation of CAPR 77-1, and the fault is on me.

Not a big deal in the slightest.

CAP does not concern itself with an explorer post breaking BSA rules; even if it is duel chartered.  Our regs are pretty clear on this.

You are correct.  However, there is nothing in CAP or BSA regulations that prohibits citizens who are not members of those organizations from voicing their opinions, concerns and complaints regarding units within the boundaries of their communities.

For example, when a Mayor sends a certificate of appreciation to a CAP or BSA unit, he or she is voicing their opinion on the exemplary performance of that unit, and has a right to be heard.  Conversely, a concerned citizen voicing a complaint about the unit also has the right to be heard.

Unlike many things in life, when it comes to this, folks can have it both ways.

[Eclipse]

Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra would be proud...

[Eagle400]

If there is something wrong going on, it sounds like they've been willing to take action in the past and presumably would now.

That's a well-educated presumption, but the current GRP/CC is a different individual than the GRP/CC who became aware of the misuse of the Deuce and a Half and confiscated it as a result.

It is also important to note that the current GRP/CC was the commander of the squadron that lost the Deuce and a Half a while back.  Not only that, but the former CAP members who abused the privilege of using a Deuce and a Half for CAP are now members of the BSA group that is attached to the very same squadron they left.

If anyone would like a character synopsis of those two individuals, please shoot me a PM.

[Duke Dillio]

I have seen a variety of different vehicles used in CAP in my time.  I've been on buses used during an encampment to transport us around.  They were not owned by CAP but a CAP officer was driving it.  At my first encampment at Ft. Belvoir, VA, we were bused to Andrews AFB where we were loaded on a USAF aircraft (can't remember but I think it was something like a 737) and flown to Wright Patterson AFB to visit the USAF museum.  I know of a CAP squadron in the Oakland area which owns two military style generators on trailers.  In another wing, during several CAP activities, I was loaded into HMMWV's and duece and a halfs and 5 ton trucks along with one ride in an FMTV.

I don't think anyone is launching any sort of personal attack here.  I also think the point has been made.  CAP is not allowed to OWN Humvees or duece and a halfs or buses.  Nowhere in CAPR 77-1 does it say that CAP members cannot own or operate such vehicles.  In fact, IIRC there is a member in one of these wings who owns a Hummer 2 and uses it for SAR missions.  I also seem to recall a member in another wing who owns his own personal helicopter and uses it for SAR missions.  This may or may not be in violation of CAPR 60-1 but I don't know if he flies it on his own or as a CAP member.  IMHO if helicopters werent' so expensive to fly, I would be all for using them in CAP ES.  My suggestion is that he probably does like some other people that I know which is once he gets the word, the CAP jacket comes off and he is a civilian doing whatever it is that he needs to do to get the job done.

I like hearing the stories about ground teams with EMT's and nurses on them when they find survivors.  I have heard of people calling the mission base and asking to be signed out so that they could provide advanced aid without violating the regs.

[Grumpy]

Hmmm, me thinks there might be some sower grapes here with regards to the original post.

[Eagle400]

Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra would be proud...

You bet he would! 

And with that, every claim made by two individuals on this forum about my "terrible" grammatical and literary skills goes right down the toilet.

[RiverAux]

If there is something wrong going on, it sounds like they've been willing to take action in the past and presumably would now.

That's a well-educated presumption, but the current GRP/CC is a different individual than the GRP/CC who became aware of the misuse of the Deuce and a Half and confiscated it as a result.

It is also important to note that the current GRP/CC was the commander of the squadron that lost the Deuce and a Half a while back.  Not only that, but the former CAP members who abused the privilege of using a Deuce and a Half for CAP are now members of the BSA group that is attached to the very same squadron they left.

Then make a report to Wing staff.  Not sure why this is an issue for the board unless you've gone through the proper channels and been shut down. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I remember CAP having buses in the 1980s -- yes, full-size AF blue buses with white tops (the white tops were authorized then) and the CAP seal by the door.

I remember CAP having generator trucks when I was a cadet in West Virginia.

But a deuce and a half? Uh, I can't imagine, though we were using a lot of DoD surplus back then.

Whatever. Not sure this is the place for tattling. If local commanders (group and wing included) won't do anything, there's a national hotline for fraud, waste and abuse. If you called it, and if you got shut down by national, you got shut down, so (to be blunt) STFU.

[Johnny Yuma]

I think I smell an Axe grinding here...

[FW]

The question of the post:
"What options are available in preventing this Boy Scout group from continuing to use this unauthorized vehicle for CAP activities and defy CAP regulations?"

The answer:
Not one.

Why?
Answered, answered again.... and again.... and again.... and again.... and again.... and again.... and again.... and.... zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

CCSE,  I'm not one to complain however, can't we just move along?  You've stated your opinion.  Everyone else has stated their's.   Before we degenerate into the children we really are   maybe we should end this thread.  

Note:  Back in "the day", our squadron had a bus and a duece and a half.  Bus got too expensive to run.  Truck became toxic waste dump.  Ahhhh, the memories.

[Eagle400]

I have seen a variety of different vehicles used in CAP in my time.  I've been on buses used during an encampment to transport us around.  They were not owned by CAP but a CAP officer was driving it.

Was he driving it as a CAP officer, or as a regular citizen? 

At my first encampment at Ft. Belvoir, VA, we were bused to Andrews AFB where we were loaded on a USAF aircraft (can't remember but I think it was something like a 737) and flown to Wright Patterson AFB to visit the USAF museum.

Cool.  I attended a Space and Missile Orientation Course at Vandenberg AFB, and transportation was provided via Air Force busses driven by CAP officers who were also USAF personnel authorized to drive such vehicles. 

At COS in 2003, I rode with two other cadets in an Air Force vehicle driven by a USAFR Major.  This was awesome, because I and the two other cadets were the first ones to arrive at National Headquarters.  There were 101 cadets enrolled as students that year, and all 98 of the other students came to join us 30 minutes after we arrived.

I know of a CAP squadron in the Oakland area which owns two military style generators on trailers.  In another wing, during several CAP activities, I was loaded into HMMWV's and duece and a halfs and 5 ton trucks along with one ride in an FMTV.

Were these HMMWV's, Deuce and a Halfs, 5 ton trucks and the one FMTV the property of DoD, or CAP?  I am assuming none of those vehicles were privately owned, because it is highly improbable for someone to come across so many military vehicles that are privately owned.  That is, unless you are at a Deuce and a Half convention. 

I don't think anyone is launching any sort of personal attack here.  I also think the point has been made.

Thanks for taking the time to notice.

CAP is not allowed to OWN Humvees or duece and a halfs or buses.  Nowhere in CAPR 77-1 does it say that CAP members cannot own or operate such vehicles.  In fact, IIRC there is a member in one of these wings who owns a Hummer 2 and uses it for SAR missions.

It is not clear to me whether or not this Deuce is owned by the squadron.

However, if the individuals responsible for having the vehicle taken away the first time are back at the squadron as adult leaders of the BSA, it is not hard for me to imagine them allowing the squadron to claim the Deuce as property of CAP.

This is the last time I will bring up the individuals in question, so if anyone would like to know how I came to develop my suspicion, just send me a PM.

I also seem to recall a member in another wing who owns his own personal helicopter and uses it for SAR missions.  This may or may not be in violation of CAPR 60-1...

It is. 

Why helicopters are prohibited for SAR missions in CAP is beyond me, but unfortunately that is the present state of things. 

...but I don't know if he flies it on his own or as a CAP member.

You may want to find out.  Especially if this person is a friend of yours who cares about his membership in CAP. 

IMHO if helicopters werent' so expensive to fly, I would be all for using them in CAP ES.  My suggestion is that he probably does like some other people that I know which is once he gets the word, the CAP jacket comes off and he is a civilian doing whatever it is that he needs to do to get the job done.

Well, your guess is as good as mine.  I don' t know if it is allowed or forbidden by 60-1 for someone to switch from being a CAP member to being a concerned citizen for the purpose of providing additional support on a SAR mission.

I like hearing the stories about ground teams with EMT's and nurses on them when they find survivors.  I have heard of people calling the mission base and asking to be signed out so that they could provide advanced aid without violating the regs.

Having been part of both a ground team and mission base (Mission Comm.), I have worked with ES personnel who have the same attitude, and I highly respect them.

The common belief that only military personnel are America's Finest is false.  America's Finest consists of any American who is willing to give his or her life so that others may live.

The same goes for prestige of service.  Any service (military or otherwise) that involves the saving of human life at the risk of personal injury or death is the highest form of service in America. 

[mikeylikey]

I think we have like 80 different threads on CAP buses, vans and vehicles.  I also think the point has been made by both sides here.  Everyone is just typing the same crap over and over again.   :clap:   

A Lock would be awesome at this time!   

[Eagle400]

I  agree.

However, before the lockdown happens, I must share with you all the visual representation of the Chain of Command for the Ventura Military Explorers:

[♠SARKID♠]

Truck became toxic waste dump.

The front axel dropped out of ours while driving down the interstate at speed.  The Colonel talking on the radio as it dropped was understandably forgiven for his language.  (This was a couple decades ago, long before my time)

[whatevah]

It is not clear to me whether or not this Deuce is owned by the squadron.

Then, IMNSHO, drop your witch hunt until you find out.  If you find out that that vehicle is officially owned and registered to that squadron, I'll send you a case of root beer, and a cookie.   If not...  I think you owe the unit an apology on here... as public as your allegations.     Until then...  consider the discussion closed.

Lock.