Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:38:58 -0500
I've been lurking for a few weeks and have yet to see anyone flamed on
this list, but I suppose there is always the first time :)
As a newcomer let me ask the unthinkable: Does the new Scout pants design
without the front leg pockets merit our unthinking loyalty? As an
Assistant Scoutmaster, I wear a complete uniform to all scout functions
including camp outs, but to my way of thinking scout pants without the
extra pockets is not a "complete" uniform!
I propose that no leader should request Scouts to buy the new pants
unless he is first in possession of a "Uniform Chip" card:
Requirements would include:
1) Lead by example by wearing a complete scout uniform. Demonstrate
that your uniform includes the front pants pockets. List at least 100
uses for these pockets.
2) Demonstrate a knowledge of alternatives to the official scout pants.
Show at least 6 kinds of pants (such as camouflage pants) that not only
have have the front pockets, but are less expensive, better designed, and
more comfortable to wear.
3) Estimate the savings to BSA of eliminating the pockets, and explain why
the uniform is still so very over-priced. Explain in your own words the
meaning of "A Scout is thrifty". Define the word "monopoly".
4) Produce a letter to you from National BSA HQ explaining the ethics of
the new, inferior design. Mass produced letters, or letters that do not
admit that they did it to "save money" are not acceptable (this
requirement my be waived if you are in possession of pants with the
missing pockets sewn on by a full time professional at "National").
5) Explain why a "Uniform Chip" card should be carried by any Scout
wearing a complete uniform. Estimate the amount of time it would take to
reply personally to millions of Boy Scouts.
Does anyone have any additional requirements they would like to add?
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City