Jeff Ream Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 8 hours ago, Stu said: Oh I understand. Yep, I get it. A real life farce of governance where the inmates running the asylum is not just a fictional play but the actual governance structure of DCI. sounds like Congress 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 i stopped reading through the whole thread, Stu gave me a headache. However this topic is very sensitive to me right now. Someone i considered a close friend was accused and agreed to a plea on this. a promising career as an educator as well as a designer/instructor in the activity thrown away. what really gets me is in the plea, after very minor time served, if they are a good little adult for a period afterwards, they can get it removed from the record and not have to go on the abuser list. This horrifies me that the legal system allows this. and from the legal docyuments posted on reddit, it has happened to someone else, thus making them eligible to teach groups again. this to me is a HUGE flaw in our already screwed up legal system. It is however why the person targeted on reddit is still working with a corps. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said: i stopped reading through the whole thread, Stu gave me a headache. However this topic is very sensitive to me right now. Someone i considered a close friend was accused and agreed to a plea on this. a promising career as an educator as well as a designer/instructor in the activity thrown away. what really gets me is in the plea, after very minor time served, if they are a good little adult for a period afterwards, they can get it removed from the record and not have to go on the abuser list. This horrifies me that the legal system allows this. and from the legal docyuments posted on reddit, it has happened to someone else, thus making them eligible to teach groups again. this to me is a HUGE flaw in our already screwed up legal system. It is however why the person targeted on reddit is still working with a corps. Yup... it would seem so. By the way, although the Cadets are currently getting the heat on this, the list of Corps that have similar type hires runs a pretty extensive list, going back years and years too as mentioned by others on here. But... Its a new day. The public has access to public records like never before, and " change is acomin " regarding spotlights being turned on regarding these things. I agree with you, that the current laws really don't seem to protect our most vulnerable... our underage children. Not the way they should anyway, But remember, underage Children can't vote, and they can't write a check to a campaign. So I suppose that others have to become their voice for them... if they are so inclined. But as we can tell from our readings, not everybody thinks there is a problem. So at least we are aware of the obstacles to " change " anyway regarding this. Edited November 1, 2017 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 (edited) 55 minutes ago, BRASSO said: How many lawyers do you think that I can find that might disagree with you about this ?. The notion that DCI could be automatically held blameless should there be a repeat sex offense from one of its member Corps hires is by no means an open and shut case. Not a day goes by in any state in the Country when a organization.. even a "Fraternal one.. believes it has no legal responsibilities to the crimes committed by one of its members... and sometimes then finds out in court that its on the losing end of that false belief that they had for themselves. A most costly wrong belief for them to have too. This petition is a GOOD thing, imo.. If DCI is already legally protecting themselves, fine. If they need to do more.. apart from what its member Corps are doing to limit trouble, then fine as well. The Petition drive seems a win-win to me. Whats the big downside ? So far, I don't see any... and havn't seen any major ones put forth from the petition detractors to this petition either. That said, I'm certainly open to listening to the Petition detractors to learn what terrible, awful things could occur from this petition... even if the petition, in your view, is misguided. So what ? You've got no skin in the game. Do you ? its not your time and energy with this petition, so why are you apparently getting so worked up with it ? I'll ignore your invectives. This petition is wrong because you said "IF". "If" DCI is already... "If they need to do more..." Says who? The lawyers? The petitioner? Public pressure? You? Who's responsible for answering "If..."? The accuser, that's who, and no evidence even of current policies has been presented as part of the petition. It's all straw men and fabricated fears. It's the "I demand...!" mentality that's most disturbing when there doesn't seem to be anything to demand change for. Edited November 1, 2017 by garfield 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 1 hour ago, garfield said: Fran, can you explain please what you mean by "front office"? Are you referring to DCI or the corps' BoD? DCI... Dan Acheson and the crew at the home office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 (edited) 43 minutes ago, garfield said: I'll ignore your invectives. This petition is wrong because you said "IF". "If" DCI is already... "If they need to do more..." Says who? The lawyers? The petitioner? Public pressure? You? . To be clear, in my opinion, DCI does not have to do anything if they choose too. And they live with that decision too. If DCI is already insulating themselves they believe from a future legal problem fine. If a Corps Director decides to take on a bigger risk to its students because it their assessment, there will not be future reoccurrances of a sex offense.. fine. Maybe in time, those decisions will prove out to be correct and no future problems occur. But then,. whats your problem with a petition that you've already told us... incorrectly, in my view... that DCI has no legal responsibility in any future sex offenses caused by one of its member Corps ? Assuming you are correct here..that DCI can never be held responsible for the crimes of its member Corps employees, and that the petition as such is silly and misguided and a waste of tiime and effort in your view. Well then.. so what ? Don't people all the time waste their energies and their time on pointless petitions ? They do. So why not simply allow people to waste their time and energy on this, if thats how you believe they are ?. What do you care ? You've already convinced yourself that DCI can not be held legally responsible in the future for a sex offense committed by one of its member Corps. So why you would care when petitioners are doing what they believe is of importance ? I see people every day do worthless, misguided things. Its their" thing ". So what ? I don't care. Its as free country. I get out of their way, freely granting them their freedoms of petition..so long as their wasted time and energy, misguided workings, etc does not negatively effect me, nor my family. That said, this particular Drum Corps petition seems harmless at worst, and productive at best. Thats my assessment anyway. So thats primarily why I have no issues with what they are setting out to do with this. I wish them success in their efforts, and hope that productive good comes from it. I see no downside to their petition drive, frankly. DCI is either doing enough already ( making the petition superfluous ) or not enough ( in which case, it will make the changes it feels is neccesary). Sounds like a win-win situation to me, with this. But if it ultimately turns out to become a total waste of their time, effort, and energy, well neither you nor I, lost a thing with that , now did we ? Edited November 1, 2017 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skevinp Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 44 minutes ago, BRASSO said: But as we can tell from our readings, not everybody thinks there is a problem. I'm not sure what this is implying, or who it is intended to implicate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 24 minutes ago, skevinp said: I'm not sure what this is implying, or who it is intended to implicate. A couple of DCP'ers ( not you ) did comment above that the petition is taking place in an environment where ( the wording used above with one poster ) " there is no problem " . That was my follow up reference point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, garfield said: I have high respect for the stuff you write here, generally, so I'm a little surprised that you allowed your understandable emotion express itself in a manner that demands policy change to solve a problem that hasn't been identified. This is how mad crowds get started. I understand your pain and disgust, really. But what, exactly would you like the petition to address that DCI and its member corps aren't now addressing actively? With all due respect and no desire what-so-ever to enflame the passions of a woman with claws. I don’t know. I’m sure my signing of the petition was also an emotional response. This kind of thing stays with you for a lifetime. Edited November 1, 2017 by Terri Schehr 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 2, 2017 Share Posted November 2, 2017 43 minutes ago, BRASSO said: To be clear, in my opinion, DCI does not have to do anything if they choose too. And they live with that decision too. If DCI is already insulating themselves they believe from a future legal problem fine. If a Corps Director decides to take on a bigger risk to its students because it their assessment, there will not be future reoccurrances of a sex offense.. fine. Maybe in time, those decisions will prove out to be correct and no future problems occur. But then,. whats your problem with a petition that you've already told us... incorrectly, in my view... that DCI has no legal responsibility in any future sex offenses caused by one of its member Corps ? Assuming you are correct here..that DCI can never be held responsible for the crimes of its member Corps employees, and that the petition as such is silly and misguided and a waste of tiime and effort in your view. Well then.. so what ? Don't people all the time waste their energies and their time on pointless petitions ? They do. So why not simply allow people to waste their time and energy on this, if thats how you believe they are ?. What do you care ? You've already convinced yourself that DCI can not be held legally responsible in the future for a sex offense committed by one of its member Corps. So why you would care when petitioners are doing what they believe is of importance ? I see people every day do worthless, misguided things. Its their" thing ". So what ? I don't care. Its as free country. I get out of their way, freely granting them their freedoms of petition..so long as their wasted time and energy, misguided workings, etc does not negatively effect me, nor my family. That said, this particular Drum Corps petition seems harmless at worst, and productive at best. Thats my assessment anyway. So thats primarily why I have no issues with what they are setting out to do with this. I wish them success in their efforts, and hope that productive good comes from it. I see no downside to their petition drive, frankly. DCI is either doing enough already ( making the petition superfluous ) or not enough ( in which case, it will make the changes it feels is neccesary). Sounds like a win-win situation to me, with this. But if it ultimately turns out to become a total waste of their time, effort, and energy, well neither you nor I, lost a thing with that , now did we ? If, if, if...look how many times you wrote it in just this response. How is it possible that it becomes acceptable that we justify throwing a gas can on a currently-sensitive subject with so many unknowns to back up the contention? OK, so you've identified that people wasting THEIR time making baseless accusations cost you nothing, but it absolutely costs DCI something. It's DCI that, with little justification, has to invest precious time and energy addressing the baseless contentions of any rabble-rouser who decides to launch a can of gas at them. It costs the activity, even if it means that the corps have to leave X amount of dollars in DCI and not for their use in order to address the baseless contentions. Had the OP presented any actual facts in the diatribe that makes up his "petition", I would have given it more due. But his/her M.O. is to only throw the gas can and expect others to clean up the mess. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.