Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [War Of 1812] Filed Safety (was The future of re-enacting?)

Expand Messages
  • Angela Gottfred
    Message 1 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
      <As an example, the idea of a 'refresher course' at Longwoods, while
      on the face of it a good one, suggests several problems to me. Who,
      for example, would nominate/draft/elect the participants?>

      Here's a suggestion, perhaps worth exactly what you paid for it: anyone who
      didn't participate in an event in the previous year, could be required to do
      the newby/refresher course.

      Your humble & obedient servant,
      Angela Gottfred
    • peter monahan
      ... wrote: Here s a suggestion, perhaps worth exactly what you paid for it: anyone who didn t participate in an event in the previous year, could be required
      Message 2 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
        --- In WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com, "Angela Gottfred" <agottfre@...>
        wrote:

        Here's a suggestion, perhaps worth exactly what you paid for it:
        anyone who didn't participate in an event in the previous year, could
        be required to do the newby/refresher course.

        Angela

        I certainly wouldn't be averse to such a plan, though I believe all
        the units I know of personally require a minimum number of drill
        sessions for new and returning members.

        But perhaps it's worth putting such a requirement in writing and
        certainly encouraging attendance at a 'refresher' can never be a bad
        idea.

        However, as I tried to suggest - perhaps too vaguely - there are two
        issues with 'requiring' safety courses and standards. One, we are
        all adults and, at least in 1812, largely self-policing: there is no
        mechanism other than moral suasion to compel conformity to any
        standard, be it safety, authenticity or any other 'standard'.
        Secondly, it's frequently the case that the units whose members most
        need remediation are those least able to see or appreciate the need
        for same! And, given point one above, who bells that cat?

        Respectfully,
        P Monahan
      • spikeyj
        On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:33:14 -0000 ... The folks running events, who have insurance premiums to worry about. Spike Y Jones ... Web mail provided by NuNet, Inc.
        Message 3 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
          On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:33:14 -0000
          "peter monahan" <petemonahan@...> wrote:
          >
          > > Anyone who didn't participate in an event in the
          > > previous year, could be required to do the
          > > newby/refresher course.
          >
          > One, we are all adults and, at least in 1812, largely
          > self-policing: there is no
          > mechanism other than moral suasion to compel conformity
          > to any
          > standard, be it safety, authenticity or any other
          > 'standard'.
          > Secondly, it's frequently the case that the units whose
          > members most
          > need remediation are those least able to see or
          > appreciate the need
          > for same! And, given point one above, who bells that
          > cat?

          The folks running events, who have insurance premiums to
          worry about.

          Spike Y Jones
          ---------------------------------------------------------------------
          Web mail provided by NuNet, Inc. The Premier National provider.
          http://www.nni.com/
        • Dale Kidd
          There is one factor involved in all of this that I fear has been overlooked. Much vitriol has been cast regarding the responsibilities of the reenacting
          Message 4 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
            There is one factor involved in all of this that I fear has been
            overlooked. Much vitriol has been cast regarding the
            responsibilities of the reenacting community as a whole and the
            individual units, but the fact remains that the idiots responsible
            for posting the offending video were not acting under the authority
            or oversight of their unit at the time, nor were they attending an
            organized event of any nature. They were obviously unfortunately
            unsupervised by anyone with an educated appreciation for the
            potential ramifications of their actions. In other words, they were
            being exactly what they actually are... teenagers with more
            enthusiasm than intelligence or experience.

            Now, I most certainly do not condone their actions, which were at
            the very least unsafe, and at worst, criminal. I can, however,
            reflect on my own younger years and think of a few things I did
            that, in retrospect, were awfully bloody stupid! And I'm willing to
            bet most of the rest of you can do likewise.

            The fact that the offending video has been removed from YouTube
            would tend to indicate that the hammer has probably already fallen
            (and pretty hard, I'm guessing) on our two cinematic geniuses.
            YouTube will generally not censor much of anything that does not
            outrageously violate the law, so they probably withdrew the video
            themselves... doubtless at the very insistant demand of the unit
            whose name they (probably without authorisation) besmirched by
            attaching it to their pet project.

            The big question becomes that of appropriate punishment. Should they
            be banned from reenacting? I personally don't think so. In fact,
            ASSUMING THAT THIS IS THEIR FIRST INFRACTION, if they were under my
            command, I would not let them off nearly so easily. In fact, I would
            be tempted to make them (within my capability) stay with the unit,
            and attend every parade and event for the next year. They would do
            all the drill, but NOT be allowed on the field. In camp, they would
            get all the work details. And they would be completely retrained,
            from scratch, in safe firearms handling. They would have to earn
            back the trust of their fellow reenactors. In short, rather than
            cast them out to find other trouble to get into, I would favour
            keeping them in the hobby and teaching them (the hard way) to be
            good, safe reenactors. In the long run, it is better to educate kids
            than just disinclude them. We can take the opportunity to teach them
            a valuable lesson and maybe turn them into somewhat wiser adults, or
            we can just abdicate the responsibility we assumed when we
            introduced them to the hobby in the first place.

            Note that I am now referring to "we"... whether it be as
            individuals, units, or the reenacting community as a whole, WE
            recruit young people into our hobby. WE introduce them to numerous
            potentially dangerous, but generally enjoyable facets of reenacting,
            such as campfires and black powder. WE therefore bear some
            responsibility in setting them straight when they screw up. And,
            being young people, they WILL screw up. Some will make more serious
            (or, as in this case, more public) mistakes than others. How we deal
            with those screwups will determine whether we keep or lose young
            people in our hobby, and possibly affect the long-term survival of
            our favourite passtime. What's more, it will be a direct reflection
            on ourselves and whether we can live up to the responsibilities we
            have assumed.

            Now, all that being said, we cannot tolerate the presence of
            individuals who refuse to learn from their mistakes. If someone is
            repeatedly unsafe, we have an obligation, based on the welfare of
            all the other members of the reenacting community (and the
            spectators who attend our events), to ban that individual from our
            midst, permanently.

            Some food for thought.

            Dale Kidd
            Fleet Master at Arms
            CFNA Naval Establishment
          • ronaldjdale@netscape.net
            In response to Dale Kidd s comments: Well said, Dale.? I keep wondering if these kids borrowed Dad s firelock for their backyard antics. The discussion on
            Message 5 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
              In response to Dale Kidd's comments:


              Well said, Dale.? I keep wondering if these kids "borrowed" Dad's firelock for their backyard antics.

              The discussion on inspections for safety is an interesting one.? The reenactment community might consider a training course for certified Historic Weapons supervisors ( a la Parks Canada's course) with enough certified to ensure that there are at least a couple at each event to maintain standards, identify issues and provide advice on further training.

              I have seen very experienced reenactors do some pretty unsafe things--like battle reenactments in a village and a cannon being fired as a spectator rounded a corner--nobody had been assigned to crowd control.? I have also seen firing towards an audience with levelled muskets, etc. etc.

              Criminal responsibility rests with the individual, his/her unit commander, the hierarchy of the organization in which the unit is involved?and the manager of the site hosting the event.? So it is to everyone's advantage to preach and enforce the safety rules.

              Ron


              ________________________________________________________________________
              Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- Unlimited storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection.


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Angela Gottfred
              Just as a postscript: I visited the website, www.fortmcintoshgarrison.org, again today, and the entire website has been replaced by generic content, with the
              Message 6 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
                Just as a postscript: I visited the website, www.fortmcintoshgarrison.org,
                again today, and the entire website has been replaced by generic content,
                with the exception of a guestbook intro which states:

                "Please respect our concern for viewers of our site, as we have been
                recieving innapropiate comments, and derogatory. Please DO NOT POST ANY OF
                THESE TYPES OF COMMENTS

                We do not want to have these comments on our site. We are a family oriented
                organization. Do Not foul our site please. We Appreciate it very much.

                Fort McIntosh Admin"


                Your humble & obedient servant,
                Angela Gottfred
              • Kevin Windsor
                Very well said Mr. Kidd! Though I would hasten to add that screw ups come in all ages. Just because someone is 15 doesn t make him more dangerous than
                Message 7 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
                  Very well said Mr. Kidd! Though I would hasten to add that screw ups come
                  in all ages. Just because someone is 15 doesn't make him more dangerous
                  than someone who is 50.



                  KW/89



                  _____

                  From: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                  Of Dale Kidd

                  Now, all that being said, we cannot tolerate the presence of
                  individuals who refuse to learn from their mistakes. If someone is
                  repeatedly unsafe, we have an obligation, based on the welfare of
                  all the other members of the reenacting community (and the
                  spectators who attend our events), to ban that individual from our
                  midst, permanently.

                  Some food for thought.

                  Dale Kidd
                  Fleet Master at Arms
                  CFNA Naval Establishment



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Dale Kidd
                  ... wrote: Just because someone is 15 doesn t make him more dangerous than someone who is 50. You are absolutely correct, sir. I merely
                  Message 8 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
                    --- In WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Windsor"
                    <kevin.windsor@...> wrote:
                    Just because someone is 15 doesn't make him more dangerous than
                    someone who is 50.


                    You are absolutely correct, sir. I merely chose not to mention that,
                    as the immediate concern was with regard to an incident of teenage
                    foolishness. I would submit that so-called "responsible adults" have
                    less excuse for acting in a dangerous fashion, and should expect
                    less forgiveness from their peers. That said, I do not believe
                    blanket banning is neccessarily the appropriate penalty for any but
                    the most serious single offense (for example, an intent to injure).
                    The imposition of restrictions similar to that I suggested for
                    younger miscreants would undoubtedly be even more effective if
                    applied to an older offender, due in no small part to the
                    embarrasment factor. Such punishment would have to be meted out by
                    the offender's unit. More importantly, the rest of the reenacting
                    community would have to support the unit by refusing to accept any
                    attempt by the offender to transfer to another unit until his period
                    of punishment has been served, and by not allowing him to take the
                    field independently during that time either.

                    Those who repetitively act without regard for the safety of
                    themselves and/or the rest of us, however, should not be welcomed
                    into our events under arms. In fact, there are doubtless a few who
                    are a danger in our camps even without benefit of weapons. For the
                    sake of our own safety, and that of our families and our spectators,
                    our community is going to be forced to divest itself of these
                    individuals.

                    ~Dale
                  • peter monahan
                    Angela Gottfred wrote: Just as a postscript: I visited the website, .fortmcintoshgarrison.org, again today, and the entire website has been
                    Message 9 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
                      "Angela Gottfred" <agottfre@...> wrote:

                      Just as a postscript: I visited the
                      website, .fortmcintoshgarrison.org,> again today, and the entire
                      website has been replaced by generic content,with the exception of a
                      guestbook intro which states:

                      "Please respect our concern for viewers of our site, as we have been
                      recieving innapropiate comments, and derogatory. Please DO NOT POST
                      ANY OF THESE TYPES OF COMMENTS

                      We do not want to have these comments on our site. We are a family
                      oriented organization. Do Not foul our site please. We Appreciate it
                      very much.

                      Fort McIntosh Admin"

                      I too visited the Fort MacIntosh guestbook - the ame day that the
                      address was posted on this site - wuith the thought that I might post
                      a comment on 'the two young [fill in perjorative of your choice]. I
                      found several dozen comments there, many strident in tone and some
                      verging on abusive. Frankly, I was disappointed and embarassed by
                      the ay many of my fellow re-enactors chose to express themselves.
                      This won't help the hobby either!

                      Peter Monahan
                    • Gordon Deans
                      Ron, I can assure you that this was not a case of these kids borrowing Dad s firelock as I saw a picture of twiddle-dee and twiddle-dumb posing in a camp
                      Message 10 of 28 , Oct 29, 2007
                        Ron,

                        I can assure you that this was not a case of these kids "borrowing
                        Dad's firelock" as I saw a picture of "twiddle-dee" and "twiddle-dumb"
                        posing in a camp with an adult (father?) between them, each in full
                        uniform and each with a musket. I was not prepared for how quickly
                        the evidence "disappeared" from the internet or I would have made
                        copies of everything for future reference. Also disconcerting was the
                        fact that they both appeared to be under the age of sixteen.

                        It is sad that there were some verbally abusive postings on the
                        offenders' web site but perhaps the parents will get the message that
                        this was not just playful teenagers firing blanks. Try to explain
                        that to the SWAT team that is responding to a "shots fired" call.

                        Certified Historic Weapons Safety Officers within the reenacting
                        community would be a plus and refresher reviews of all safety
                        guidelines at the beginning of each year would be useful reminders of
                        what we all "know" but sometimes have forgotten.

                        We are all aware of at least 4 - 5 safety incidents in the past year
                        in North America mostly involving experienced reenactors. How many
                        could have been avoided if people had spoken up or filed an incident
                        report previously and stopped the dangerous behaviour.

                        Remember, all it takes is for one occurrence of a serious injury to
                        end our black powder hobby in Canada.

                        Gord

                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: <ronaldjdale@...>
                        To: <WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com>
                        Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 3:32 PM
                        Subject: Re: [War Of 1812] Re: The future of re-enacting?


                        In response to Dale Kidd's comments:

                        Well said, Dale. I keep wondering if these kids "borrowed" Dad's
                        firelock for their backyard antics.

                        The discussion on inspections for safety is an interesting one. The
                        reenactment community might consider a training course for certified
                        Historic Weapons supervisors (a la Parks Canada's course) with enough
                        certified to ensure that there are at least a couple at each event to
                        maintain standards, identify issues and provide advice on further
                        training.

                        I have seen very experienced reenactors do some pretty unsafe
                        things--like battle reenactments in a village and a cannon being fired
                        as a spectator rounded a corner--nobody had been assigned to crowd
                        control. I have also seen firing towards an audience with levelled
                        muskets, etc. etc.

                        Criminal responsibility rests with the individual, his/her unit
                        commander, the hierarchy of the organization in which the unit is
                        involved and the manager of the site hosting the event. So it is to
                        everyone's advantage to preach and enforce the safety rules.

                        Ron
                      • Mark Dickerson
                        Original message: Also disconcerting was the fact that they both appeared to be under the age of sixteen. Why is it disconcerting about their age? Is it
                        Message 11 of 28 , Oct 30, 2007
                          Original message:

                          " Also disconcerting was the fact that they both appeared to be under the
                          age of sixteen."




                          Why is it disconcerting about their age? Is it just because they were
                          acting so foolishly at a young age? Hopefully not just because they are
                          young. In Ontario you can hunt at age 12 with a Hunter Apprenticeship
                          Safety Card provided you have passed both the Ontario Hunter Education
                          Course exam and the Canadian Firearms Safety Course exam.



                          Mark Dickerson



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Angela Gottfred
                          He was firing a gun while unsupervised by an adult. Pretty sure that s illegal where they were (Pittsburgh, Pa) if you re under 18. Your humble & obedient
                          Message 12 of 28 , Oct 30, 2007
                            He was firing a gun while unsupervised by an adult. Pretty sure that's
                            illegal where they were (Pittsburgh, Pa) if you're under 18.


                            Your humble & obedient servant,
                            Angela Gottfred

                            Mark Dickerson wrote:

                            Why is it disconcerting about their age? Is it just because they were
                            acting so foolishly at a young age? Hopefully not just because they are
                            young. In Ontario you can hunt at age 12 with a Hunter Apprenticeship
                            Safety Card provided you have passed both the Ontario Hunter Education
                            Course exam and the Canadian Firearms Safety Course exam.
                          • Mark Dickerson
                            Yes his actions were illegal. But my point is that in Ontario, a 12 year old can use a firearm so long as he obeys the law. Mark D From:
                            Message 13 of 28 , Oct 30, 2007
                              Yes his actions were illegal. But my point is that in Ontario, a 12 year
                              old can use a firearm so long as he obeys the law.



                              Mark D





                              From: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                              Of Angela Gottfred
                              Sent: October 30, 2007 8:32 AM
                              To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: RE: [War Of 1812] Re: The future of re-enacting?



                              He was firing a gun while unsupervised by an adult. Pretty sure that's
                              illegal where they were (Pittsburgh, Pa) if you're under 18.

                              Your humble & obedient servant,
                              Angela Gottfred

                              Mark Dickerson wrote:

                              Why is it disconcerting about their age? Is it just because they were
                              acting so foolishly at a young age? Hopefully not just because they are
                              young. In Ontario you can hunt at age 12 with a Hunter Apprenticeship
                              Safety Card provided you have passed both the Ontario Hunter Education
                              Course exam and the Canadian Firearms Safety Course exam.





                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • gilbertmartin60
                              ... Well said Mr. Kidd, Will you be the one to tell David and Jim? ;) Gil Martin
                              Message 14 of 28 , Oct 30, 2007
                                --- In WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com, "Dale Kidd" <ucpm_gunner@...> wrote:

                                > Now, all that being said, we cannot tolerate the presence of
                                > individuals who refuse to learn from their mistakes. If someone is
                                > repeatedly unsafe, we have an obligation, based on the welfare of
                                > all the other members of the reenacting community (and the
                                > spectators who attend our events), to ban that individual from our
                                > midst, permanently.
                                >
                                > Some food for thought.
                                >
                                > Dale Kidd
                                > Fleet Master at Arms
                                > CFNA Naval Establishment

                                Well said Mr. Kidd,
                                Will you be the one to tell David and Jim? ;)
                                Gil Martin
                              • Dale Kidd
                                The comment made by Mr. Martin was innapropriate to the forum, and I have responded to him privately. Please, let s not get back into this quagmire on this
                                Message 15 of 28 , Oct 30, 2007
                                  The comment made by Mr. Martin was innapropriate to the forum, and I
                                  have responded to him privately. Please, let's not get back into
                                  this quagmire on this group.

                                  ~Dale

                                  --- In WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com, "gilbertmartin60"
                                  <gilbertmartin60@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > --- In WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com, "Dale Kidd" <ucpm_gunner@> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > > Now, all that being said, we cannot tolerate the presence of
                                  > > individuals who refuse to learn from their mistakes. If someone
                                  is
                                  > > repeatedly unsafe, we have an obligation, based on the welfare
                                  of
                                  > > all the other members of the reenacting community (and the
                                  > > spectators who attend our events), to ban that individual from
                                  our
                                  > > midst, permanently.
                                  > >
                                  > > Some food for thought.
                                  > >
                                  > > Dale Kidd
                                  > > Fleet Master at Arms
                                  > > CFNA Naval Establishment
                                  >
                                  > Well said Mr. Kidd,
                                  > Will you be the one to tell David and Jim? ;)
                                  > Gil Martin
                                  >
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.