Main Menu

CPPT

Started by Huey Driver, May 10, 2011, 02:13:20 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Eclipse

^ Well, there's no cure for stupid, no matter which flavor it is.  People like that need to be booted, though the parents need to go as well, and booting them is a lot harder.

"That Others May Zoom"

NIN

#41
Quote from: Eclipse on May 13, 2011, 02:19:40 AM
^ Well, there's no cure for stupid, no matter which flavor it is.  People like that need to be booted, though the parents need to go as well, and booting them is a lot harder.

Man, ain't that the truth!

There was something odd going on with the parents, and the girl's younger sister was actually in a different squadron (to this day, I'm not 100% sure what the deal there was) and there was some pretty strange behavior there, too, according to the squadron commander. 

The long and the short of it, however, was that a guy was patently violating the CPP, wouldn't listen to anybody who was looking out for him, and eventually he got taken to task for it.  He's darn lucky that he didn't wind up in the iron bar bed & breakfast and having to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
Darin Ninness, Col, CAP
I have no responsibilities whatsoever
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2024 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

FARRIER

Quote from: NIN on May 13, 2011, 01:49:50 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on May 12, 2011, 09:31:42 PM
Quote from: NIN on May 12, 2011, 09:22:41 PMI wasn't one-on-one with just one cadet, thankfully, at least there were two of them.
You've mentioned this several times, was this a local wing directive?  Its never been in the regs.

The old CPP training included avoidance of one-on-one situations with cadets (it was based on the BSA training video and materials, which, having just taken the BSA youth-protection training online, is still the guidance from BSA), which brought about the whole "no lone zone" terminology.

The basic concept was avoiding being in a one-on-one situation with a cadet whereupon it would be your word against his/hers if there was an allegation of abuse toward the senior member.

I remember all this too when it first came out. Transitioned from Cadet to Senior in 1986.
Photographer/Photojournalist
IT Professional
Licensed Aircraft Dispatcher

http://www.commercialtechimagery.com/stem-and-aerospace

FARRIER

Quote from: EMT-83 on May 11, 2011, 05:21:02 PM
Quote from: FW on May 10, 2011, 11:36:15 AM
In 1990, all senior members had to undergo a background check and submitt to finger printing.  In 1991, the first CPPT was implemented.  We needed this due to some very disturbing "discoveries" over the previous couple of years. 

On one hand, we lost thousands of members over this.  On the other hand..... best thing we ever did, at the time, to protect our cadets.

Why were so many members lost?

I know of in least one case, the member was a convicted sex offender.
Photographer/Photojournalist
IT Professional
Licensed Aircraft Dispatcher

http://www.commercialtechimagery.com/stem-and-aerospace

Grumpy

Quote from: FARRIER on May 13, 2011, 08:41:00 AM
Quote from: EMT-83 on May 11, 2011, 05:21:02 PM
Quote from: FW on May 10, 2011, 11:36:15 AM
In 1990, all senior members had to undergo a background check and submitt to finger printing.  In 1991, the first CPPT was implemented.  We needed this due to some very disturbing "discoveries" over the previous couple of years. 

On one hand, we lost thousands of members over this.  On the other hand..... best thing we ever did, at the time, to protect our cadets.

Why were so many members lost?

I know of in least one case, the member was a convicted sex offender.

We had a senior member (Lt Col) who got through the system until he was sent off to jail for molesting a young girl.  Easyest 2B I ever did.