Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 18, 2019, 10:03:59 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: New CAPR 39-2 Civil Air Patrol Membership
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 [All] Send this topic Print
Author Topic: New CAPR 39-2 Civil Air Patrol Membership  (Read 17145 times)
Ŗτε
Global Moderator

Posts: 805
Unit: PCR-CA-423

« on: August 04, 2011, 08:53:25 PM »

A new CAPR 39-2 Civil Air Patrol Membership has been posted.
Report to moderator   Logged
jeders
Global Moderator

Posts: 2,210

« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2011, 09:12:33 PM »

As well as new application for cadet and senior membership. Interestingly, we are now supposed to verify a cadet's identity using one of a number of items before they can become members.
Report to moderator   Logged
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse
DakRadz
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,365

« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2011, 09:15:18 PM »

Change one each in that title: letter, number.

Then I'll be happy.

Having skimmed through it, I see several clarifications that are rather nice and welcome. I refuse to start the argument so I won't name specifics, but this looks fairly clear and simple.

YMMV, haven't the motivation to tear it apart as I found the sections pertaining to me.

jeders, that is interesting.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2011, 09:18:42 PM by DakRadz » Report to moderator   Logged
davidsinn
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,017
Unit: NW-IN

« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2011, 09:24:17 PM »

As well as new application for cadet and senior membership. Interestingly, we are now supposed to verify a cadet's identity using one of a number of items before they can become members.

What 12 year old will have the proper IDs?
Report to moderator   Logged
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn
Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,081
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2011, 09:25:46 PM »

As well as new application for cadet and senior membership. Interestingly, we are now supposed to verify a cadet's identity using one of a number of items before they can become members.

Probably a good idea. Even though I provided a copy of my green card when I joined, I was still allowed to call myself Michael and adjust my last name to the "proper" spelling. This was April 2003. I legally changed my name to the CAP name May 2010.
Report to moderator   Logged
Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,081
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2011, 09:26:39 PM »

As well as new application for cadet and senior membership. Interestingly, we are now supposed to verify a cadet's identity using one of a number of items before they can become members.

What 12 year old will have the proper IDs?

Passport, SS, Birth certificate, etc.

You really need ONE gov photo ID, and then anything else will work.
Report to moderator   Logged
NC Hokie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 932
Unit: MER-NC-057

« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2011, 09:28:54 PM »

About the new applications...

1) Wouldn't it have made more sense to put the commander's certification of citizenship in the commander's signature area? I can see many applications coming back from applicants with this part filled out, followed by a blank look when the commander asks where their identification is. Seems to me that the commander's certification would be better placed after ALL of the applicant info, including the demographic info and medical info on the second page.

2) I really wish they'd take out the part telling the applicant to rush the application to NHQ.  IMHO, it should be the squadron's job to do this, as we're the ones that have to verify citizenship, make sure that the application is complete, and make copies for the files and wing HQ.

3) This is more of a peeve, but it really isn't hard to make sure that cell borders in a Word table align with one another.
Report to moderator   Logged
NC Hokie, Lt Col, CAP

Graduated Squadron Commander
All Around Good Guy
jeders
Global Moderator

Posts: 2,210

« Reply #7 on: August 04, 2011, 09:31:38 PM »

As well as new application for cadet and senior membership. Interestingly, we are now supposed to verify a cadet's identity using one of a number of items before they can become members.

What 12 year old will have the proper IDs?

Passport, SS, Birth certificate, etc.

You really need ONE gov photo ID, and then anything else will work.

And again, how many 12 year olds have a gov't issue photo ID? I personally have never met one. Seniors on the other hand, who also have to have their ID verified now, usually have multiple photo IDs.

Yes, they should have a SS card or copy of their birth cert. However, these are probably going to have to be dug out of a deep dark drawer somewhere. If not, replacements will have to be ordered which just increases the costs and barriers for cadets to participate.
Report to moderator   Logged
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse
MSG Mac
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,046
Unit: MER-MD-071

« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2011, 09:45:05 PM »

With the new government rules imposed since 9/11, everybody should have a birth certificate, even children need one when they enroll in school. Social Security Cards are also required for children now if they even have 1 penny in a bank account or have savings bond given as birth or baptism gifts.
Report to moderator   Logged
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
davidsinn
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,017
Unit: NW-IN

« Reply #9 on: August 04, 2011, 09:48:44 PM »

With the new government rules imposed since 9/11, everybody should have a birth certificate, even children need one when they enroll in school. Social Security Cards are also required for children now if they even have 1 penny in a bank account or have savings bond given as birth or baptism gifts.

Papers Please?
Report to moderator   Logged
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,756
Unit: Smoots

« Reply #10 on: August 04, 2011, 09:52:14 PM »

As well as new application for cadet and senior membership. Interestingly, we are now supposed to verify a cadet's identity using one of a number of items before they can become members.

What 12 year old will have the proper IDs?

Well, after looking at the list, I think it will be pretty easy. A report card and a SS card fill the requirements. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
jeders
Global Moderator

Posts: 2,210

« Reply #11 on: August 04, 2011, 09:54:53 PM »

With the new government rules imposed since 9/11, everybody should have a birth certificate, even children need one when they enroll in school. Social Security Cards are also required for children now if they even have 1 penny in a bank account or have savings bond given as birth or baptism gifts.

Yes, they have them. But that doesn't mean that they are readily available. As I said, they are likely buried away in a drawer/file/safe somewhere because it's not something that they should need on any sort of regular basis. Personally, I think needing your SS Card for anything other than employment application and collecting Social Security is total bunk, but I'll leave that for another time.
Report to moderator   Logged
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse
NC Hokie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 932
Unit: MER-NC-057

« Reply #12 on: August 04, 2011, 10:07:32 PM »

<SLAPS HEAD>

I just realized that the cadet application implies that a birth certificate, social security card, or state ID ALONE are sufficient documentation of citizenship.  Unfortunately, Attachment 2 of the new reg requires that they be paired with some other documentation to adequately verify the applicant's citizenship.  I see two things happening because of this...

1) We'll get lots of practice telling Applicant Snuffy that we can't process their application because we need some more documentation;

2) This will get pencil-whipped as long as one of the five documents listed on the application are presented.
Report to moderator   Logged
NC Hokie, Lt Col, CAP

Graduated Squadron Commander
All Around Good Guy
RADIOMAN015
Banned

Posts: 1,990

« Reply #13 on: August 04, 2011, 10:07:38 PM »

They really seem very concerned about making sure that the individual apply for membership  is really who they say they are, even on cadets.  Of course this is the same form used for someone who is being employed, except that we actually have to get copies of the document and attach.   I don't think CAP has the proper security at the unit level to be keeping certified birth certificates, and/or copies of social security cards, driver license, or military ID cards.

Seems to me also allowing a losing commander 60 days to disapprove a transfer is excessive.  Most people that transfer do it for a reason and don't need to be held hostage.   I would think 2 weeks would be sufficient, with 30 days as the maximum time.

The "oath" seems to be a big deal with them throughout the regulation.

The assignment of duties by the Commander at face value seems to state the commander can assign you to any duty he/she feels you should do, BUT of course the reality of the situation is the member needs to have an interest and an aptitude to perform that (those) duty(ies).
RM   
 
 
Report to moderator   Logged
DakRadz
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,365

« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2011, 10:13:50 PM »

<SLAPS HEAD>

2) This will get pencil-whipped as long as one of the five documents listed on the application are presented.

Common sense before service before self.
Report to moderator   Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,756
Unit: Smoots

« Reply #15 on: August 04, 2011, 10:18:31 PM »

FYI, SSANs have been required for children since the early '90s, well before 9/11. The requirement came about because of increased tax fraud when the Earned Income Tax Credit was introduced.

The ID requirement is one from list A, or one from list B and one from list C. This ain't rocket surgery. The commander needs to see, not copy and retain, the ID items. If mommy and daddy can't produce the required items, the new cadet likely has bigger issues in the background.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
NC Hokie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 932
Unit: MER-NC-057

« Reply #16 on: August 04, 2011, 11:26:54 PM »

FYI, SSANs have been required for children since the early '90s, well before 9/11. The requirement came about because of increased tax fraud when the Earned Income Tax Credit was introduced.

The ID requirement is one from list A, or one from list B and one from list C. This ain't rocket surgery. The commander needs to see, not copy and retain, the ID items. If mommy and daddy can't produce the required items, the new cadet likely has bigger issues in the background.

Right, but that's NOT what the application says, which will cause unnecessary confusion with mommy and daddy UNLESS we (at the unit level) send a copy of Attachment 2 of the new reg home with the application.
Report to moderator   Logged
NC Hokie, Lt Col, CAP

Graduated Squadron Commander
All Around Good Guy
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,756
Unit: Smoots

« Reply #17 on: August 04, 2011, 11:34:51 PM »

Simple enough. Do you talk with the parents at all before allowing a cadet to join?
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
NC Hokie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 932
Unit: MER-NC-057

« Reply #18 on: August 04, 2011, 11:38:47 PM »

Simple enough. Do you talk with the parents at all before allowing a cadet to join?

Sure I do, and I'll even make a copy of that list for the application packet I send home with them. I just don't think that it's too much to ask that an application (ESPECIALLY a newly revised one) include all of the information needed to complete it properly.
Report to moderator   Logged
NC Hokie, Lt Col, CAP

Graduated Squadron Commander
All Around Good Guy
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,720

« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2011, 11:43:29 PM »

And again, how many 12 year olds have a gov't issue photo ID? I personally have never met one. Seniors on the other hand, who also have to have their ID verified now, usually have multiple photo IDs.

Yes, they should have a SS card or copy of their birth cert. However, these are probably going to have to be dug out of a deep dark drawer somewhere. If not, replacements will have to be ordered which just increases the costs and barriers for cadets to participate.

Well that is the whole point.  We don't want people who can't prove their identity to join.

As for having to have replacements made....they will have to have them anyways eventually.  Heck my son's soccer team requires birth certificates.  Most school require them as well as does the DMV.

When you think that a CAP ID can grant access to most USAF bases....I think is is incumbant on CAP to make sure that we are not giving some Jihadist an easy way to get around base security.
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
RADIOMAN015
Banned

Posts: 1,990

« Reply #20 on: August 05, 2011, 12:26:19 AM »

And again, how many 12 year olds have a gov't issue photo ID? I personally have never met one. Seniors on the other hand, who also have to have their ID verified now, usually have multiple photo IDs.

Yes, they should have a SS card or copy of their birth cert. However, these are probably going to have to be dug out of a deep dark drawer somewhere. If not, replacements will have to be ordered which just increases the costs and barriers for cadets to participate.

Well that is the whole point.  We don't want people who can't prove their identity to join.

As for having to have replacements made....they will have to have them anyways eventually.  Heck my son's soccer team requires birth certificates.  Most school require them as well as does the DMV.

When you think that a CAP ID can grant access to most USAF bases....I think is is incumbant on CAP to make sure that we are not giving some Jihadist an easy way to get around base security.
I agree especially for senior members that we need to know the person applying really is that person, because we don't control the fingerprint card, so unless we can see a picture ID for a reputable source, we really wouldn't know the true identify based upon a social security card (which can easily be stolen).
Actually even for the finger print card, even IF it was someone else, unless they had a finger print on file, the FBI really has no way of knowing who's finger print is really on that card.
RM
Report to moderator   Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,756
Unit: Smoots

« Reply #21 on: August 05, 2011, 01:32:13 AM »

Simple enough. Do you talk with the parents at all before allowing a cadet to join?

Sure I do, and I'll even make a copy of that list for the application packet I send home with them. I just don't think that it's too much to ask that an application (ESPECIALLY a newly revised one) include all of the information needed to complete it properly.

It appears that there simply isn't enough room on the new form for the lists of acceptable documents.

« Last Edit: August 05, 2011, 01:36:16 AM by SarDragon » Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
MSG Mac
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,046
Unit: MER-MD-071

« Reply #22 on: August 05, 2011, 03:52:36 AM »

The SS card actually says "Not to be used for Identification" This seems to stem from fears in the 30's of creeping socialism and the creation of a national identity card.
Report to moderator   Logged
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,720

« Reply #23 on: August 05, 2011, 03:56:43 AM »

Well in my life time...that has never been adheared to.

It is only since the internet has made identity theft so easy has anyone made an effort to move away from that.
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #24 on: August 05, 2011, 04:02:38 AM »

Yes, they should have a SS card or copy of their birth cert. However, these are probably going to have to be dug out of a deep dark drawer somewhere. If not, replacements will have to be ordered which just increases the costs and barriers for cadets to participate.

These days hospitals strongly recommend, and provide the means for, buying lots of original copies of a newborn's birth certificate, because they will
need them throughout their life, and everybody wants an original.  I know we ordered 20 or 30 for my kids, respectively, and have probably already gone through 5 or 6 (at least).  They are also not in a dark file underneath the socks, and any kid with health insurance, enrolled in school, and / or getting
any sort of government services will have had to provide proof or birth, status, etc., any number of times.

I realize that kids from homes with dramatic circumstance may not have this readily available, but the average member, cadet or senior, should.

For any kid without at least one copy on hand, we're doing him a service making him go and get one.
Report to moderator   Logged


SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,756
Unit: Smoots

« Reply #25 on: August 05, 2011, 04:45:20 AM »

The SS card actually says "Not to be used for Identification" This seems to stem from fears in the 30's of creeping socialism and the creation of a national identity card.

Maybe yours does, but the ones issued in the last 30 years or so don't. My original card (1966) said that, but my current one (1978?) doesn't.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
spacecommand
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 545

« Reply #26 on: August 05, 2011, 04:50:12 AM »

I see a typo on page 25 attachment 2.

Item 1 says US PASSPORT of US PASSPORT CARD

Shouldn't it say "or" instead "of"  same for the item 2 .

Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #27 on: August 05, 2011, 04:57:49 AM »

The SS card actually says "Not to be used for Identification" This seems to stem from fears in the 30's of creeping socialism and the creation of a national identity card.

Does it say "If found, return to Franklin Delano Roosevelt."?
Report to moderator   Logged


JeffDG
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,179

« Reply #28 on: August 05, 2011, 12:47:28 PM »

I see a typo on page 25 attachment 2.

Item 1 says US PASSPORT of US PASSPORT CARD

Shouldn't it say "or" instead "of"  same for the item 2 .
You can blame USCIS for that.  That's the base I-9 list of documents.

My 7 year old daughter actually has two forms of photo ID, and will soon have a third once I push some paper.

And if they're sticking to this list, then a birth certificate, SS card, or even both, won't cut it.  You need one from List A, or 1 from B+1 from C.  Essentially these are for work eligibility, and intended to show proof of identity (photo ID) + proof of legal status (like US birth certificate proves citizenship).

Report to moderator   Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,756
Unit: Smoots

« Reply #29 on: August 05, 2011, 08:58:49 PM »

Here's Column B:

1. Driverís license or ID card issued by a State or outlying possession of the United States provided it contains a photograph or information such as name, date of birth, gender, height, eye color, and address
2. ID card issued by federal, state or local government agencies or entities, provided it contains a photograph or information such as name, date of birth, gender, height, eye color, and address
3. School ID Card with a photograph
4. Voterís registration card
5. U.S. Military card or draft record
6. Military dependentís ID card
7. U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Mariner Card
8. Native American tribal document
9. Driverís license issued by a Canadian government authority
10. School record or report card
11. Clinic, doctor, or hospital record
12. Day-care or nursery school record


The bold items are the most likely ones available for cadets. This ain't brain science. Y'all seem to be making this way more complicated than it really is.

Couple any of these with a SS card or birth certificate, and the requirement is satisfied.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
spacecommand
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 545

« Reply #30 on: August 05, 2011, 09:16:49 PM »

So a new member has to show one from column A, which not everyone has.

Or one from column B AND column C,  even the TSA is not that strict.

Report to moderator   Logged
jimmydeanno
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,155
Unit: ǝnƃoɹ

« Reply #31 on: August 05, 2011, 09:24:10 PM »

But every employer is.
Report to moderator   Logged
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #32 on: August 05, 2011, 09:37:20 PM »

So a new member has to show one from column A, which not everyone has.

Or one from column B AND column C,  even the TSA is not that strict.

TSA requires two forms of ID for access to the gates - a boarding pass and a photo ID.
Report to moderator   Logged


Dad2-4
Seasoned Member

Posts: 370

« Reply #33 on: August 05, 2011, 10:54:05 PM »

I have to say that I agree with stricter ID proof for new members. I also haven't read anything here of anyone having experience with a non-eligible person trying to join. I had a bunch of kids wanting to join a new flight we were starting up at school. I had one very motivated kid whom I knew was illegal (he told me) and had to tell him he couldn't join due to lack of legal status. Granted, he didn't try to falsify anything, but there were 2 other cadets who joined where I had suspicion of illegality but had no proof. So I support the new reg. I don't see that it will cause any changes in the number of new recruits, senior or cadet.
Report to moderator   Logged
spacecommand
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 545

« Reply #34 on: August 06, 2011, 12:20:59 AM »

There's a Senior Member over at the Spangdahlem overseas unit (in Germany) who's not a US citizen (or foreigner living in the United States, since he doesn't live in the US, he lives in Luxembourg and is a Luxembourg national, if he joined today he would not be able to produce some of the required documents).  Apparently he had to get a special waiver to join.  Of course this is a very rare case in CAP dealing with an overseas squadron.

http://www.spangdahlem.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123058584

Report to moderator   Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,756
Unit: Smoots

« Reply #35 on: August 06, 2011, 12:30:27 AM »

IIRC, he's posted on here or CS.

Yes, he did need a waiver, but I think it was relatively easy to get. He provided the requested documents, and had testimonials about his character.

What the new reg is asking isn't hard to do. Really.

BTW, I've successfully processed membership apps for foreign nationals with green cards. They went right through.

In fact, a green card isn't even necessary. Items 3 and 5 in List A cover that.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
Fubar
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 789

« Reply #36 on: August 06, 2011, 04:41:09 AM »

TSA requires two forms of ID for access to the gates - a boarding pass and a photo ID.

Except for those under 18 years old - they do not have to have any identification at all. Your point for adults however is of course quite valid.
Report to moderator   Logged
JeffDG
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,179

« Reply #37 on: August 06, 2011, 06:58:53 PM »

But every employer is.
Bingo...that's exactly where the list comes from.  Every employer is supposed to fill out an I-9 for every new employee, with exactly these ID requirements.
Report to moderator   Logged
JeffDG
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,179

« Reply #38 on: August 06, 2011, 07:03:03 PM »

IIRC, he's posted on here or CS.

Yes, he did need a waiver, but I think it was relatively easy to get. He provided the requested documents, and had testimonials about his character.

What the new reg is asking isn't hard to do. Really.

BTW, I've successfully processed membership apps for foreign nationals with green cards. They went right through.

In fact, a green card isn't even necessary. Items 3 and 5 in List A cover that.
Green card is actually item #2 in list A.  A green card is formally known as an I-551.

#3 is only temporary, and incredibly rare right now.  Generally speaking, a person goes from approval to having a physical green card in a matter of 1-2 weeks.  Only if they need to travel during that small window do they ever get the I-551 stamp in their passport.

#5 is not for permanent residents.  #5 is for those who are in the US on a temporary status (Like TN-1, L-1 or H-1b).  In that case, their employment is actually limited to the sponsoring employer.  Individuals in this status require a waiver from National in order to join CAP.  It's not difficult to get (I needed one when I joined for example, but have since adjusted status to being a Lawful Permanent Resident with an I-551)
Report to moderator   Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,756
Unit: Smoots

« Reply #39 on: August 06, 2011, 11:15:13 PM »

IIRC, he's posted on here or CS.

Yes, he did need a waiver, but I think it was relatively easy to get. He provided the requested documents, and had testimonials about his character.

What the new reg is asking isn't hard to do. Really.

BTW, I've successfully processed membership apps for foreign nationals with green cards. They went right through.

In fact, a green card isn't even necessary. Items 3 and 5 in List A cover that.
Green card is actually item #2 in list A.  A green card is formally known as an I-551.

#3 is only temporary, and incredibly rare right now.  Generally speaking, a person goes from approval to having a physical green card in a matter of 1-2 weeks.  Only if they need to travel during that small window do they ever get the I-551 stamp in their passport.

#5 is not for permanent residents.  #5 is for those who are in the US on a temporary status (Like TN-1, L-1 or H-1b).  In that case, their employment is actually limited to the sponsoring employer.  Individuals in this status require a waiver from National in order to join CAP.  It's not difficult to get (I needed one when I joined for example, but have since adjusted status to being a Lawful Permanent Resident with an I-551)

Was what I said wrong? If so, how? If not, what's your point? I read and fully understood the contents of List A before I posted.

BTW, there was a time, not so long ago, when there was a several month backlog for issuing green cards. Back in the late '70s, when they transitioned to the current card, the backlog was 14+ months.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,720

« Reply #40 on: August 07, 2011, 01:26:28 AM »

Took about 8 months for my wife to get her replacement card.
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #41 on: August 07, 2011, 01:47:12 PM »

I have to say that I agree with stricter ID proof for new members. I also haven't read anything here of anyone having experience with a non-eligible person trying to join. I had a bunch of kids wanting to join a new flight we were starting up at school. I had one very motivated kid whom I knew was illegal (he told me) and had to tell him he couldn't join due to lack of legal status. Granted, he didn't try to falsify anything, but there were 2 other cadets who joined where I had suspicion of illegality but had no proof. So I support the new reg. I don't see that it will cause any changes in the number of new recruits, senior or cadet.

I actually find this funny because foreigners are allowed to join the US military itself, but they still go through a rigorous background check, MEPS, etc.  It does not automatically grant them citizenship but they can serve in the US military.  Maybe I'm wrong.  Did this change?  Either way, CAP is voluntary, not employment, so.... what's the big deal?  Cadets and even Seniors are paying to serve.  If the background check clears, then let them.
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #42 on: August 07, 2011, 01:50:34 PM »

Here's Column B:

1. Driverís license or ID card issued by a State or outlying possession of the United States provided it contains a photograph or information such as name, date of birth, gender, height, eye color, and address
2. ID card issued by federal, state or local government agencies or entities, provided it contains a photograph or information such as name, date of birth, gender, height, eye color, and address
3. School ID Card with a photograph
4. Voterís registration card
5. U.S. Military card or draft record
6. Military dependentís ID card
7. U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Mariner Card
8. Native American tribal document
9. Driverís license issued by a Canadian government authority
10. School record or report card
11. Clinic, doctor, or hospital record
12. Day-care or nursery school record


The bold items are the most likely ones available for cadets. This ain't brain science. Y'all seem to be making this way more complicated than it really is.

Couple any of these with a SS card or birth certificate, and the requirement is satisfied.

I read somewhere else that some units have many home school cadets who join.  This seems great but in those cases are items 3 and 10 covered by a computer printout from the home computer?  If not, what if they don't have a clinic, etc?  Just wondering... would items 3 & 10 technically be covered by the guardian?  Would you want it notarized?  *shrug*
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #43 on: August 07, 2011, 04:20:50 PM »

A background check for someone who is fraudulently identifying themselves is useless.

If you're an RSO, convicted of a felony, an illegal alien, or worse, someone with nefarious intent against the government, you would be inclined to falsify documents to gain membership.

I don't think it is asking to much for us to know to whom we are entrusting aircraft which cost several hundred thousand dollars, the safety of cadets in their care, thousands of dollars of computer equipment, or information which may be of a sensitive nature.

Though the conspiracy theorists will shouts "privacy!", it is not applicable in this case, and I can't think of a single legitimate reason why anyone who is eligible for membership would want to hide their identity.

Further, at least on AFAMs, we are pseudo-employees of the USAF, which is why we are afforded FECA and FTCA (I know, I know, it's more complicated than that, etc.).
Report to moderator   Logged


Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #44 on: August 07, 2011, 04:24:29 PM »

I read somewhere else that some units have many home school cadets who join.  This seems great but in those cases are items 3 and 10 covered by a computer printout from the home computer?  If not, what if they don't have a clinic, etc?  Just wondering... would items 3 & 10 technically be covered by the guardian?  Would you want it notarized?

These are situations where an exception might be made after more extensive investigation by the wing.

The list of documents provides the "quick and done" avenue for identification.  There are other means, which take longer, but are possible, assuming both sides are willing to have the conversation.  People who have chosen to live outside the normalities of "the system", are used
to this, and will either comply, or they won't.  If they won't, they probably aren't good candidates for C AP membership anyway.

Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #45 on: August 07, 2011, 05:19:28 PM »

A background check for someone who is fraudulently identifying themselves is useless.

If you're an RSO, convicted of a felony, an illegal alien, or worse, someone with nefarious intent against the government, you would be inclined to falsify documents to gain membership.


You do know that the FBI does those checks, right?  Also, the identity is additionally verified by local law enforcement when the member goes in to get fingerprinted.  If anything was false it should appear.  So, are you saying that in your opinion this additional check is needed because the current process is not good enough?  Don't forget that those who would try to defraud you may defraud those verification documents too, so I'm not sure what the  point would be then UNLESS CAP Admin and personnel officers are now going to be trained experts with high tech detection equipment.  That would be a neat Specialty Track but highly unnecessary.  I just want to know what the real reason is.  Meaning, if the background checks are not up to a real standard, why?  If they are, then stop saying they are not.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 05:23:27 PM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #46 on: August 07, 2011, 05:32:09 PM »

I read somewhere else that some units have many home school cadets who join.  This seems great but in those cases are items 3 and 10 covered by a computer printout from the home computer?  If not, what if they don't have a clinic, etc?  Just wondering... would items 3 & 10 technically be covered by the guardian?  Would you want it notarized?

These are situations where an exception might be made after more extensive investigation by the wing.

The list of documents provides the "quick and done" avenue for identification.  There are other means, which take longer, but are possible, assuming both sides are willing to have the conversation.  People who have chosen to live outside the normalities of "the system", are used
to this, and will either comply, or they won't.  If they won't, they probably aren't good candidates for C AP membership anyway.

Normalities?  What is normal?  First of all, "normalities" is not even a proper word, but if you're trying to define "social norms", well, in this context homeschooling is more of an increasing "norm" for most students in a few states. At the very least many parents are also starting to augment public or private school with additional home schooling.  So I would not say that people who chose to home-school are outside any "norm."  It's an increasing trend and we should be mindful of those folks in this situation.  They'll still have access to other records if not their own.

As for expecting them to "comply" well, in this example they are producing copies of the records they would have available, so if they gave you those documents, with or without a "waiver" being requested and subsequently granted, well, did they not just comply per the instructions?  What more could you ask for?  I could see this easily being resolved with an optional state I.D. that most people can get from the local DMV prior to being eligible to drive (e.g. ID but no driving privileges).  If they can afford cadet membership then they could also afford one of these per child.  It's great for other ID purposes anyway, right?  But if you need additional documents, well, I'm sure that this won't be a problem, but it just might be that if you give them that list, they might give you homeschool records.  These are true records nonetheless per the instruction. *Shrug*  So, what would you do then, hand them back and say, "Even though this is what we asked for, it's not good enough.  What else do you got?"  That's rather confusing don't you think?

Overall, this process will bog down the volunteer system that processes these papers, BUT, I don't think it asking too much to let would-be cadets join, work on progression items (so we don't lose them), but just not allow them to make any major base visits until then.  As for Seniors, I would expect a higher standard anyway.  E.g. let those seniors work on Level I requirements until their background clears.  However, at that point, we already verified that they are who they said they were, didn't we (e.g the fingerprint card when local law enforcement asked for I.D. and the new additional I-9 check)?

On the cadet side, was the system really that broken? *shrug*
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 05:40:01 PM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #47 on: August 07, 2011, 05:33:15 PM »

You do know that the FBI does those checks, right?
Based only on the information provided, if it is false, it may not pop anything. 

Also, the identity is additionally verified by local law enforcement when the member goes in to get fingerprinted.  If anything was false it should appear.  So, are you saying that in your opinion this additional check is needed because the current process is not good enough?
There is no requirement that "law enforcement" take the fingerprints, nor are they necessarily required to "verify someone's identity", nor is the agency who took the fingerprints identified on the fingerprint card.

There are any number of unit who have a fingerprint kit in the unit and take the prints themselves.  So there is no independent verification that the prints on the card are the prints of the person being checked.

Don't forget that those who would try to defraud you may defraud those verification documents too, so I'm not sure what the  point would be then UNLESS CAP Admin and personnel officers are now going to be trained experts with high tech detection equipment.  That would be a neat Specialty Track but highly unnecessary.  I just want to know what the real reason is.  Meaning, if the background checks are not up to a real standard, why?  If they are, then stop saying they are not.

Just because you know some people will try and hop the fence does not mean you don't lock the gate.  Our duty as commanders is to do all
that we can, within reason, to identify the people standing in front of us.  We don't abdicate that simply because some may choose to attempt to game the system or slip through.

An argument made for years is that members should be re-checked regularly - lots can happen in a 25-year CAP career, but we're not doing that, either.
Report to moderator   Logged


Ned
Resident Philosopher

Posts: 2,244

« Reply #48 on: August 07, 2011, 05:36:22 PM »

  I just want to know what the real reason is.  Meaning, if the background checks are not up to a real standard, why?  If they are, then stop saying they are not.

There are no black helicopters here.

The CAP background checks are not designed to, nor do they, verify identity.  IOW, the FBI does not tell us "Yes, this is John Jones."

The FBI only tells us if the fingerprint card submitted belongs to someone convicted of certain crimes (mostly felonies).  Which fortunately happens rarely.  And even then, the results are only seen by an extremely small group of folks at NHQ.  The specific information is not passed down the volunteer chain.

Bottom line, identity verification and criminal background checks are different processes serving different purposes.
Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #49 on: August 07, 2011, 05:41:17 PM »

Normalities?  What is normal?  First of all, "normalities" s not even a word, but if you're trying to define "social norms", well, in this context homeschooling is more of an increasing "norm" for most students in a few states. At the very least many parents are also starting to augment public or private school with additional home schooling.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/normalities

The norm for education in the United States is public school.
Overall, this process will bog down the volunteer system that processes these papers,
This will bog down nothing.  There isn't a unit in the country processing enough memberships for this to be anything but a conversation on the new procedure.

didn't the fingerprint card already do that when local law enforcement asked for I.D.?
Nope.  As pointed out, you're checking the prints sent in, which may, or may not, be the person standing in front of you.

Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #50 on: August 07, 2011, 05:55:53 PM »

You do know that the FBI does those checks, right?
Based only on the information provided, if it is false, it may not pop anything. 
You said "may," so do you have inside information about how these are processed?  If not, let's leave it there because further consideration would be hearsay and that's not going to get us anywhere.  Something appears to be broken with the current process if all we can deduce is "may."
Also, the identity is additionally verified by local law enforcement when the member goes in to get fingerprinted.  If anything was false it should appear.  So, are you saying that in your opinion this additional check is needed because the current process is not good enough?
There is no requirement that "law enforcement" take the fingerprints, nor are they necessarily required to "verify someone's identity", nor is the agency who took the fingerprints identified on the fingerprint card.

There are any number of unit who have a fingerprint kit in the unit and take the prints themselves.  So there is no independent verification that the prints on the card are the prints of the person being checked.
I stand corrected.  It appears that CAPR 20-1 Organization of Civil Air Patrol allows the unit PO to handle this on their own.  When I joined, this person was also a local LEO.  Hence my confusion, but it appears that other organizations do require an LEO to verify their cards (e.g. fire, first aid, etc.), so there you have it.  We should require fingerprint cards to be done by local LEOs.  Just my opinion but it would serve as a good check, don't you think?
Don't forget that those who would try to defraud you may defraud those verification documents too, so I'm not sure what the  point would be then UNLESS CAP Admin and personnel officers are now going to be trained experts with high tech detection equipment.  That would be a neat Specialty Track but highly unnecessary.  I just want to know what the real reason is.  Meaning, if the background checks are not up to a real standard, why?  If they are, then stop saying they are not.

Just because you know some people will try and hop the fence does not mean you don't lock the gate.  Our duty as commanders is to do all
that we can, within reason, to identify the people standing in front of us.  We don't abdicate that simply because some may choose to attempt to game the system or slip through.

An argument made for years is that members should be re-checked regularly - lots can happen in a 25-year CAP career, but we're not doing that, either.
Okay, but was there hopping the fence?  Meaning, was what we did before (especially with cadets) a major problem?  I agree with updated checking.  Afterall, we do it for those wanting a security clearance for COunterDrug operations and if they fail they are rechecked.  AND, if we're going to update the rules, then lets require everyone to submit to them.  HOWEVER, and this is a big one, what is so wrong with having citizens of other countries joining CAP.  Meaning, why not allow for that on the form, why must they seek a "waiver."  All things considered, if you have a clean record, meet the CAP missions, and take the Oath, why should citizenship be any kind of barrier?
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #51 on: August 07, 2011, 06:08:42 PM »

Hence my confusion, but it appears that other organizations do require an LEO to verify their cards (e.g. fire, first aid, etc.), so there you have it.  We should require fingerprint cards to be done by local LEOs.  Just my opinion but it would serve as a good check, don't you think?
A good check, yes. Possible?  Not likely.

An increasing number of departments use livescan and some will no longer do fingerprints for us at all.  Further, without a pretty hefty MOU, no LEO is going to accept the potential liability for mis-identifying someone just because we asked.

As it stands today, units with a benevolent relationship with local PD are still able to get this done for them, or are able to do it themselves.

What "other organizations" are mandating a local LEA substantiate identification?
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 06:12:21 PM by Eclipse » Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #52 on: August 07, 2011, 06:08:59 PM »

Normalities?  What is normal?  First of all, "normalities" s not even a word, but if you're trying to define "social norms", well, in this context homeschooling is more of an increasing "norm" for most students in a few states. At the very least many parents are also starting to augment public or private school with additional home schooling.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/normalities

The norm for education in the United States is public school.
Reference.com has merely linked "normalities" to the term "norm."  That's why I used the word "norm" in my previous reply.  Even then, this is not a scholarly source.  There's no linguistic study behind it and at best the way you have chosen to use this word is in a form of odd slang.  If you mean to say "average" then don't beat around the bush just say "average," or "mean, mode, etc.."

Also, the norm for education in the United States is NOT public school.  In the United States of America there is a great divide.  If you had said that "formal" education was the norm, then I might believe you, because while there is a trend in homeschooling, formal education is still quite the norm.  However, for every public school there is at least one private school counterpart, so try again.
Overall, this process will bog down the volunteer system that processes these papers,
This will bog down nothing.  There isn't a unit in the country processing enough memberships for this to be anything but a conversation on the new procedure.
Yes, this will bog the system because assuming personnel officers are being diligent.  They will need to wait and verify and retain a record of same.  Again, these verifications take time, we're a volunteer organization.  It will not bog down the current process of the next echelon approving and retaining same, but the initial front line personnel officer (at their unique discretion) will likely feel bogged.  Ask your current personnel officer how they feel about this.  In fact, the initial preparations I'm assuming are underway...and let's face it, paperwork does indeed take time.  This will add processing time because these checks need to be done and were not done before.  Do the math.  Maybe it's minor bogging, but bogging nonetheless.
didn't the fingerprint card already do that when local law enforcement asked for I.D.?
Nope.  As pointed out, you're checking the prints sent in, which may, or may not, be the person standing in front of you.
I conceded to the point you made about this elsewhere, and I believe that local law enforcement should be doing these.  Just my opinion.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 06:32:22 PM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #53 on: August 07, 2011, 06:13:08 PM »

What takes time?

Show me the docs.

Thanks, welcome to CAP.

Done.

There is absolutely, positively, no trend towards home schooling in the United States, those who choose to take that non-standard route are simply more visible because of the internet and media attention.  That is neither an indictment nor an endorsement of home schooling, it is the simple fact of the matter.

It also has nothing to do with properly identifying yourself.  Kids in most public elementary schools have no more (or less) identification than anyone else, and if you choose to home-school for high school, then get a state ID and move on.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 06:18:06 PM by Eclipse » Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #54 on: August 07, 2011, 06:21:52 PM »

An increasing number of departments use livescan and some will no longer do fingerprints for us at all.  Further, without a pretty hefty MOU, no LEO is going to accept the potential liability for mis-identifying someone just because we asked.

Liability?  Sorry, LEOs do not take liability in the course of thier duties.  It's referred to as "governmental immunity" and even "absolute" or "qualified immunity."  No harm from what I can see?  Plus, even if you could sue for that, you'd have to prove damages, and what would that be in this case?

As it stands today, units with a benevolent relationship with local PD are still able to get this done for them, or are able to do it themselves.

That's fine, but any citizen can go in and request same.  You may have to make an appointment but it takes not even 5 minutes once they do it.

What "other organizations" are mandating a local LEA substantiate identification?
I'm not quite sure what you're asking here because of comma usage or lack thereof, but see my comment just above.  In either case, consider an applicant wishing to work for any of the known government agencies using those as you say "outdated" cards.... well, they still use them and you are required to get local LEOs to verify same (e.g. if you wished to work for say Border Patrol, Dept. of Homeland Security, etc...)  I mean the list is rather extensive.  Live scan is great but not everyone needs or is using it.
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #55 on: August 07, 2011, 06:24:38 PM »

I understand you are a Ph.d student, but if you're going to pick on commas, I'm going to point SARDRAGON at you and then you'll be sorry.
Ned's likely to get yo as well.

You said "other organizations" require LEA's to verify identity.  Employment doesn't count, as that is an issue of Federal Law.  I didn't refer to anything as outdated.

Name them.

No local agency is going to verify anyone's identity unless they are mandated to by law, or have agreed to via an MOU or similar agreement.
Citing "immunity" is anecdotal interesting, but not really relevant.  Also, immunity may shield an agency from liability, but not from egg on its face.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 06:29:07 PM by Eclipse » Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #56 on: August 07, 2011, 06:28:32 PM »

What takes time?

Show me the docs.

Thanks, welcome to CAP.

Done.
How about the new Regulations for membership?  Did you read those yet? :)
There is absolutely, positively, no trend towards home schooling in the United States, those who choose to take that non-standard route are simply more visible because of the internet and media attention.  That is neither an indictment nor an endorsement of home schooling, it is the simple fact of the matter.

It also has nothing to do with properly identifying yourself.  Kids in most public elementary schools have no more (or less) identification than anyone else, and if you choose to home-school for high school, then get a state ID and move on.

I dislike how you speak in absolutes.  Like it or not, there is a trend.  I'm not going to bore you with an extensive bibliography but it supports a trend (UNLESS you don't buy the US census), here's a start for your reading pleasure:

http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0053/twps0053.html#dis

"...the data examined in this paper show that it has established itself as an alternative to regular school for a small set of families, and is poised to continue its growth. In 1999 around 790,000 children between the ages of 6 and 17 were being schooled at home, and in the late 1990s the number was apparently growing."


http://www.nheri.org/Research-Facts-on-Homeschooling.html

"It appears the homeschool population is continuing to grow (at an estimated 2% to 8% per annum over the past few years)."
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #57 on: August 07, 2011, 06:31:27 PM »

2-8% is the virtual definition of a minority, and therefore "abnormal".

"apparently growing" - you'll have to do better than that.

Not to mention that second source cited is biased.

Absolutely.

Positively.

None.
Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #58 on: August 07, 2011, 06:50:07 PM »

I understand you are a Ph.d student, but if you're going to pick on commas, I'm going to point SARDRAGON at you and then you'll be sorry.
Ned's likely to get yo as well.

Hah, okay, good call!  I'm not perfect, but something posted there was confusing.  I wasn't trying to be nit picky nor create an Ad hominem attack, rather, I was just seeking clarification.  I wanted to be on the same page; same when others use "different" terminology.  Also, don't worry, my wife is a Ph.D. in Composition, Communication, & TESOL, and I receive a tongue lashing or two whenever I'm grammatically incorrect or not up to par.  So, no need to sick the other language attack dogs on me, I'm just perfectly fine at home with my Editor-and-Spouse! :)

You said "other organizations" require LEA's to verify identity.  Employment doesn't count, as that is an issue of Federal Law.  I didn't refer to anything as outdated.

Name them.

No local agency is going to verify anyone's identity unless they are mandated to by law, or have agreed to via an MOU or similar agreement.
Citing "immunity" is anecdotal interesting, but not really relevant.  Also, immunity may shield an agency from liability, but not from egg on its face.
I actually said LEOs, but yes, that was my point.  If other governmental agencies require verification, and we too (as CAP) require the same verification, then I suppose that's why we are using the I-9 route.  I mean, didn't you notice how the verification instruction addendum was fairly much the same as the Federal one for employment?  Seems like a wonderful copy and paste job to me.  There's nothing wrong with that.  It's just, I was corrected that we actually don't need LEOs to verify fingerprint cards, but when I was a first responder for local first aid, ran for city council, applied for the DHS CBP, etc, and so on and so forth... and I'm sure others know what I'm talking about here, well they were verified by local LEOs.  So, if it's good enough for them, why should it not be good enough for us?

The only difference was that when I joined the fingerprint card was competed by the PO for our SQ who was an LEO with local PD.  In fact, some local PDs might even charge for the fingerprint card and that might be a problem but not ours.  Also, when it comes to cadets we're saying, hey, you don't have an ID card, well go to the state, pay for and get one, so for seniors, unless the local PD issues them for free well, why not do it this way?  At most, maybe a $5 charge from the local PD fingerprint officer.

I'm sure many will disagree with me, but that's cool!  After all, if it ain't broke should we fix it?  I mean, is this not the same mentality coming from these new regulations?  I'm trying to follow the same spirit of that, if not sarcastically, and I don't know which emoticon goes with that.  Sorry.  :(  But, I'm not at all opposed to them either, I just wouldn't want to be the person having to process them all . . .
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 06:56:15 PM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #59 on: August 07, 2011, 06:58:01 PM »

2-8% is the virtual definition of a minority, and therefore "abnormal".

"apparently growing" - you'll have to do better than that.

Not to mention that second source cited is biased.

Absolutely.

Positively.

None.

Yes, apparently growing because that first report was from 1999 data in 2001.  At that time it was inconclusive.  So I gave you the 2nd source to consider.  Hey, there's no way you read that entire US Census report that quick.  Even then, I said this would not be an extensive bibliography.  There's at least a new decades worth of great data to consider.  So, mosey down to your local library, get on Ebsco host, click on scholarly sources, and type in "home school" or "home school trends" or whatever you desire.  Read those several dozen of 30 page articles that verify what looks like a pretty good trend.  Spend some time looking at it.  If you can't, well, sadly that's your issue not mine, but I have faith you will before making absolute statements.  What sources told you otherwise?  Don't forget, the issue was not strictly on home-schooling.... private schools are equally in number to public schools on all levels (and yes, I would include parochial schools in there as well).

It is what it is buddy. :)  QED
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 07:04:09 PM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #60 on: August 07, 2011, 07:01:58 PM »

I'm have no interest in doing your research for you.
Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #61 on: August 07, 2011, 07:06:14 PM »

I'm have no interest in doing your research for you.

I already did "my" research, and I have also taught courses on this very subject.  You should do your own homework; the data is out there in plain sight.
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #62 on: August 07, 2011, 07:16:15 PM »

I'm comfortable in my assertions, and don't need to "provide data", as you can't prove a negative.

If you believe it is important to prove otherwise, provide the data, not directions to the library(or links to a 10-year old census and a biased website).
Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #63 on: August 07, 2011, 07:18:39 PM »

I'm comfortable in my assertions, and don't need to "provide data", as you can't prove a negative.

If you believe it is important to prove otherwise, provide the data (vs. link to a 10-year old census and a biased website).

I would post the studies, but it would violate copyright laws.  So, if you're unwilling to look them up, then there's not much I can do to change your comfortable position.  Are you a message board troll or something?  I ask because I give you information, you refute that with "bias" or disinterest without even reading it, and yet you keep trying to flame the issue.  A little reading never hurt anyone.

Here's a start:
References

Princiotta, D., Bielick, S., Chapman, C., & National Center for Education Statistics (ED), W. C. (2004). 1.1 Million Homeschooled Students in the United States in 2003. Issue Brief. NCES 2004-115. National Center for Education Statistics, Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Leeds, M. A. (2010). Academic achievement of students in a charter homeschool. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A, 71, Retrieved from EBSCOhost..

Scheps, S. G. (1999). Homeschoolers in the Library. School Library Journal, 45(2), 38. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Lines, P. M., & National Inst. on Student Achievement, C. C. (1999). Homeschoolers: Estimating Numbers and Growth. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Reindl, T. (2005). Homeschooling in the United States: Growth... and Growing Pains. College and University, 80(3), 35-36. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Reindl, T. (2005). Homeschooling in the United States: GrowthÖand Growing Pains. College & University, 80(3), 35-36. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Luebke, R. V., & Wisconsin Policy Research Inst., M. e. (1999). Homeschooling in Wisconsin: A Review of Current Issues and Trends. Report. Wisconsin Policy Research Report. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Hadderman, M., & ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, E. R. (2002). Homeschooling. Trends and Issues. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Ray, B. D. (2006). Research Facts on Homeschooling. General Facts and Trends. National Home Education Research Institute, Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Cambre, B. M. (2009). Tearing down the Walls: Cyber Charter Schools and the Public Endorsement of Religion. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 53(4), 61-64. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Bielick, S., Chapman, C., & National Center for Education Statistics (ED), W. C. (2003). Trends in the Use of School Choice: 1993 to 1999. Statistical Analysis Report. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

DiPerna, P., & Friedman Foundation for Educational, C. (2009). Virginia's Opinion on K-12 Education and School Choice. School Choice Survey in the State. Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 07:24:18 PM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #64 on: August 07, 2011, 07:22:09 PM »

I'm comfortable in my assertions, and don't need to "provide data", as you can't prove a negative.

If you believe it is important to prove otherwise, provide the data (vs. link to a 10-year old census and a biased website).

I would post the studies, but it would violate copyright laws.

If they are available on the web, there is no violation of copyright.  If at least the results aren't public, I would question their veracity anyway.

Let the bell toll...
Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #65 on: August 07, 2011, 07:26:42 PM »

I'm comfortable in my assertions, and don't need to "provide data", as you can't prove a negative.

If you believe it is important to prove otherwise, provide the data (vs. link to a 10-year old census and a biased website).

I would post the studies, but it would violate copyright laws.

If they are available on the web, there is no violation of copyright.  If at least the results aren't public, I would question their veracity anyway.

Let the bell toll...

Again, copyright, but here's the persistent links to those articles I posted about above.... you may need to pay a subscription for access.  Not every relevant scholarly source that is useful can be found on "Google" or the web.  You should have learned that in college my friend.

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED484747&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2010-99130-024&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=1559078&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED456167&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ732596&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=16885557&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED447571&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED473001&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED494583&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ851079&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED480216&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->

<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://navigator-iup.passhe.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED508321&site=ehost-live
End of citation-->
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 11:11:00 PM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
JeffDG
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,179

« Reply #66 on: August 07, 2011, 08:17:45 PM »

If they are available on the web, there is no violation of copyright. 
Seriously?  You need to look a bit LOT closer at Title 17 if you actually believe that.  This very post is subject to copyright.
Report to moderator   Logged
Spaceman3750
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,700

« Reply #67 on: August 07, 2011, 08:21:53 PM »

Regarding home schooling, your state laws will vary but in Illinois a home school is legally considered to be a private institution (or at least it was several years ago). That means that realistically the parent could fabricate a school ID of sorts and it would be acceptable as verification of identity, at least in IL.
Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #68 on: August 07, 2011, 09:22:14 PM »

If they are available on the web, there is no violation of copyright. 
Seriously?  You need to look a bit LOT closer at Title 17 if you actually believe that.  This very post is subject to copyright.

Yes, subject to.

Everything can be subject to CR, that doesn't make re-posting or linking information already public a CR violation.
Report to moderator   Logged


Spaceman3750
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,700

« Reply #69 on: August 07, 2011, 09:27:22 PM »

The link I got was a KLN login screen. Only accessible to certain folks. The info isn't public, but behind a login. CR has been protected.

I now return you to your armchair lawyering.
Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #70 on: August 07, 2011, 09:30:36 PM »

The link I got was a KLN login screen. Only accessible to certain folks. The info isn't public, but behind a login. CR has been protected.

I now return you to your armchair lawyering.

What?  You're not going to pay to validate someone else's claims?

Troll?
Report to moderator   Logged


Spaceman3750
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,700

« Reply #71 on: August 07, 2011, 09:33:18 PM »

The link I got was a KLN login screen. Only accessible to certain folks. The info isn't public, but behind a login. CR has been protected.

I now return you to your armchair lawyering.

What?  You're not going to pay to validate someone else's claims?

Troll?

Actually, it's behind a university login. Only members of certain institutions can log in.

Now, if he had copy and pasted the studies outside of their system, THAT would have violated the copyright (unlawful redistribution).
Report to moderator   Logged
JeffDG
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,179

« Reply #72 on: August 07, 2011, 09:51:16 PM »

If they are available on the web, there is no violation of copyright. 
Seriously?  You need to look a bit LOT closer at Title 17 if you actually believe that.  This very post is subject to copyright.

Yes, subject to.

Everything can be subject to CR, that doesn't make re-posting or linking information already public a CR violation.
Linking, I'll support.  But reposting without the author's permission is copyright infringement in most cases.  (Situations like narrowly defined "fair use" excepted)

Every time you commit a idea or creative work to a tangible form (like this for instance), copyright attaches immediately.  There is no need to register or claim such rights as the author thereof.  Protection is immediate and automatic.

Whether the holder chooses to exercise or enforce those rights is up to the holder.  If, however, the copyright holder chooses to enforce those rights, you might want to consider the possibility of up to $150k / infringement for civil statutory damages, or $250k + jail time for criminal infringement.  In addition, the successful copyright complaintant can recover attorney's fees, and in one recent case, those totaled $137m (of which only $105m was actual attorney's fees, the other $32m was miscellaneous costs).
Report to moderator   Logged
DakRadz
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,365

« Reply #73 on: August 07, 2011, 10:13:47 PM »

 [Filter subversion]

Maybe I will look into law school.
Report to moderator   Logged
cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #74 on: August 07, 2011, 11:04:32 PM »

The link I got was a KLN login screen. Only accessible to certain folks. The info isn't public, but behind a login. CR has been protected.

I now return you to your armchair lawyering.

What?  You're not going to pay to validate someone else's claims?

Troll?

Actually, it's behind a university login. Only members of certain institutions can log in.

Now, if he had copy and pasted the studies outside of their system, THAT would have violated the copyright (unlawful redistribution).
:clap:
Thank you!  This I knew since I took Property Law in law school.  I gave a reference page too, but Eclipse and anyone else for that matter can either type in the information at any library with scholarly access or contact those journals/authors directly.  For those who don't know, those journals retain CR over those articles and they license libraries for access to them.  There is a trend where some are becoming free to the public, but a slow trend at best.  The local library, even university library is free, and well, if people like Eclipse have time to make statements like that, then surely there is time to do some research.
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time With Silver Clasp
*
Posts: 30,205

« Reply #75 on: August 08, 2011, 12:45:40 AM »

Or...I don't know...you could use common sense and quote commonly available sources.

This is an internet forum, not a master's thesis. 

The fact that you can't quote more mainstream sources likely means it is because you can't find any.

Regardless, again, do your own research and quote it, or don't. 

A superior attitude and the pretense of some scholarly "force power" won't buy you much here.
Report to moderator   Logged


cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #76 on: August 08, 2011, 01:30:01 AM »

Or...I don't know...you could use common sense and quote commonly available sources.
I did but you then rejected them and called them bias and outdated.

This is an internet forum, not a master's thesis. 
A master's thesis is actually well beyond the depth and scope of anything on this forum
The fact that you can't quote more mainstream sources likely means it is because you can't find any.

Regardless, again, do your own research and quote it, or don't. 
As explained, I did, it's unethical and illegal to quote an entire document for you.  You need to read it for yourself and decide.  I'm not your tutor.
A superior attitude and the pretense of some scholarly "force power" won't buy you much here.
Get over yourself.  Again, these are commonly available.  It's not my fault that you look down on the professional world.  If it were not for these scholars most of our society would not exist as it is today.  If you wish to limit yourself to what you consider "mainstream" then you will often be ignorant of the realities of society and all social phenomenon therein.  Grow up! I mean, you would still read and follow the Regs if they weren't available online, wouldn't you?  Not every resource is going to come to you in the form of a free handout.  DO as you wish, but to each there own.  And if you keep up with this attitude then don't get upset when people call you out on your b.s.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2011, 01:50:30 AM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,652

« Reply #77 on: August 08, 2011, 01:33:13 AM »

Or...I don't know...you could use common sense and quote commonly available sources.

This is an internet forum, not a master's thesis. 

The fact that you can't quote more mainstream sources likely means it is because you can't find any.

Regardless, again, do your own research and quote it, or don't. 

A superior attitude and the pretense of some scholarly "force power" won't buy you much here.

Get over yourself.  These are commonly available.  It's not my fault that you look down on the professional world.  If it were not for these scholars most of our society would not exist as it is today.  Grow up!

Take your own advice son, grow up. You're the one coming off as a spoiled brat. Remember rule #1 for posting, "Do not post when you are angry."
Report to moderator   Logged
cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #78 on: August 08, 2011, 01:38:04 AM »

Take your own advice son, grow up. You're the one coming off as a spoiled brat. Remember rule #1 for posting, "Do not post when you are angry."

How is this so?  What makes you think I'm spoiled?  I paid my own way through college, law school, masters, and now a PhD.  I'm not angry, just supporting a point.  I will tell it like it is.  If someone doesn't like the truth, well, there's not much I can do about it.  Ignoring it isn't going to make it go away, and letting people make absolute negative statements that are simply untrue about others who are in our organization should not be tolerated either.  Simply put, I will leave it there.  It's not like he had an open mind anyway.  Further, if I am willing to go the extra mile to seek the truth and another is not but continues to reject the evidence, then yes, I would argue that I am superior in the case of the argument.  Why?  Because at least then I did try to meet them halfway with the realities of what we know, they rejected it without even reading any document ("mainstream" or otherwise).  In this case I gave solid, legitimized data and research.  How is that a bad thing?

If I offended anyone by actually supporting a point when it was demanded, well, shucks, sorry.  I don't mean to come off as pompous though online it may seem so, rather, I'm supporting my point and counterpoint.  So to make sure my intentions are clearly understood, here's a smiley face.  :)
« Last Edit: August 08, 2011, 01:56:51 AM by cust0s » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
spaatzmom
Seasoned Member

Posts: 288

« Reply #79 on: August 08, 2011, 11:54:42 AM »

Take your own advice son, grow up. You're the one coming off as a spoiled brat. Remember rule #1 for posting, "Do not post when you are angry."

How is this so?  What makes you think I'm spoiled?  I paid my own way through college, law school, masters, and now a PhD.  I'm not angry, just supporting a point.  I will tell it like it is.  If someone doesn't like the truth, well, there's not much I can do about it.  Ignoring it isn't going to make it go away, and letting people make absolute negative statements that are simply untrue about others who are in our organization should not be tolerated either.  Simply put, I will leave it there.  It's not like he had an open mind anyway.  Further, if I am willing to go the extra mile to seek the truth and another is not but continues to reject the evidence, then yes, I would argue that I am superior in the case of the argument.  Why?  Because at least then I did try to meet them halfway with the realities of what we know, they rejected it without even reading any document ("mainstream" or otherwise).  In this case I gave solid, legitimized data and research.  How is that a bad thing?

If I offended anyone by actually supporting a point when it was demanded, well, shucks, sorry.  I don't mean to come off as pompous though online it may seem so, rather, I'm supporting my point and counterpoint.  So to make sure my intentions are clearly understood, here's a smiley face.  :)


Wow!!!!!  I have no dog in this measuring contest, wrong parts thankfully.  But I can say that you do come off as elitist with continually throwing your presumed PhD around.  Yes I say presumed as I have no categorical proof that you indeed possess that degree, after all anyone can state such easily especially on an internet forum.  You are new to this forum and instead of taking the time to learn who you are talking to, you just start attacking others knowledge of the organization; most of them have been in CAP for over 25 years.  They have more insight and therefore credibility concerning it than, I am sorry to say ..... you.

My family has been through the entire program from Curry through Spaatz and now Wilson awards and guess what, I am still learning interesting tidbits about CAP.  It is an ever changing organism.

Good luck with your membership and hopeful growth within the "family" and please do remember that many wing commanders and others who can have a direct affect in your CAP future are also posters here.
Report to moderator   Logged
CDCTF
Recruit

Posts: 43

« Reply #80 on: August 08, 2011, 12:16:31 PM »

I for one, got a kick out of reading some of this. It was, entertaining to say the least. So many feathers being ruffled. Here in a couple years I'm going to start writing P.E. after everything I write on here. Then everyone will know I'm right.
Report to moderator   Logged
cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #81 on: August 08, 2011, 04:28:04 PM »

Wow!!!!!  I have no dog in this measuring contest, wrong parts thankfully.  But I can say that you do come off as elitist with continually throwing your presumed PhD around.  Yes I say presumed as I have no categorical proof that you indeed possess that degree, after all anyone can state such easily especially on an internet forum.  You are new to this forum and instead of taking the time to learn who you are talking to, you just start attacking others knowledge of the organization; most of them have been in CAP for over 25 years.  They have more insight and therefore credibility concerning it than, I am sorry to say ..... you.

My family has been through the entire program from Curry through Spaatz and now Wilson awards and guess what, I am still learning interesting tidbits about CAP.  It is an ever changing organism.

Good luck with your membership and hopeful growth within the "family" and please do remember that many wing commanders and others who can have a direct affect in your CAP future are also posters here.

Yeah, I'm done with this conversation.  Others brought up my Ph.D.  I only confirmed it and everything else has been kept on topic.  I'm only new to posting on this forum and I have been in CAP for 10 years plus AFROTC and trained with fellow real cadets at the AFA.  It's too bad that you think I'm elitist simply because I'm finishing my degree.  In my experience those who don't have one get upset and attack those who do, and this is just simply ridiculous.  Try to have an open mind.  Good luck to you as well, mom.
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
cust0s
Banned

Posts: 34

« Reply #82 on: August 08, 2011, 04:32:48 PM »

I for one, got a kick out of reading some of this. It was, entertaining to say the least. So many feathers being ruffled. Here in a couple years I'm going to start writing P.E. after everything I write on here. Then everyone will know I'm right.

How does that make you right?  Just like when people write rank and title after their name?  No harm in that if you're really a P.E.  Both my father (retired USAF Col. too) and brother are P.E.s; good luck!
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain, CAP
Deputy Commander, et al.
--
Ph.D. Student (Criminology), LAW, M.A., CERT., B.A.
AFROTC, Cadet (2001-2004)
--
The post above and beneath this one is a lie.
spaatzmom
Seasoned Member

Posts: 288

« Reply #83 on: August 08, 2011, 05:38:21 PM »

Wow!!!!!  I have no dog in this measuring contest, wrong parts thankfully.  But I can say that you do come off as elitist with continually throwing your presumed PhD around.  Yes I say presumed as I have no categorical proof that you indeed possess that degree, after all anyone can state such easily especially on an internet forum.  You are new to this forum and instead of taking the time to learn who you are talking to, you just start attacking others knowledge of the organization; most of them have been in CAP for over 25 years.  They have more insight and therefore credibility concerning it than, I am sorry to say ..... you.

My family has been through the entire program from Curry through Spaatz and now Wilson awards and guess what, I am still learning interesting tidbits about CAP.  It is an ever changing organism.

Good luck with your membership and hopeful growth within the "family" and please do remember that many wing commanders and others who can have a direct affect in your CAP future are also posters here.

Yeah, I'm done with this conversation.  Others brought up my Ph.D.  I only confirmed it and everything else has been kept on topic.  I'm only new to posting on this forum and I have been in CAP for 10 years plus AFROTC and trained with fellow real cadets at the AFA.  It's too bad that you think I'm elitist simply because I'm finishing my degree.  In my experience those who don't have one get upset and attack those who do, and this is just simply ridiculous.  Try to have an open mind.  Good luck to you as well, mom.

In my experience those who don't have one get upset and attack those who do, and this is just simply ridiculous.  Try to have an open mind.

That is the type of statement that shouts no screams elitism.  You have no idea what my education level is because I feel it is unimportant to stroke my own feathers to others about it.  You on the other hand have told me to have an open mind and have no problem at all in being quite patronizing to others, possibly to make yourself appear more important.  That is not going to fly well with anyone. Fellow real cadets is another insulting example.  Twice in 8 sentences, you have attempted to insult me, someone you have never met that I am aware of.  And yet, I do believe I could pick you out of a crowd very easily and remain very underwhelmed at your magnificence.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 [All] Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: New CAPR 39-2 Civil Air Patrol Membership
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.188 seconds with 26 queries.