[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by bigsig

You guys don't think it's a good idea to check the backgrounds of adults involved with children?

That isn't what I said, but now that you asked.

• BI, especially the low-level which are conducted, discover very little. It will only catch those with a standing criminal background record.
• An umpire should not be involved with the players at any point. They are there to officiate a softball game, not to interact with a child.

Our State requires fingerprint and background checks for all school officials. A HS basketball official in a neighboring county was just arrested for following a player around the school before the game asking to see her feet!

School organizations are not the same. Their activities are conducted with the school complete liable in loco parentis. ASA is not, nor should they want to be. Odds are your basketball official would have done whatever it was he was doing. For that matter, without the full story, I don't know if he did anything illegal.

I think a background check to keep people like that out of the ASA is a small price for me to pay and a great idea. It's unfortunately a sign of the times.

I disagree. Having worked in the high-value secure transportation business and an auditor and USN high-level communications prior to that, I have constantly witnessed people who you think should never get passed a poly or BI are standing next to you, doing a job which involves high security and trust.

Keeping them out of ASA or any other organization will not stop these type of people. If a game official, and you will find one example almost anywhere in the country (out of how many sports officials?), commits illegal acts toward a minor, my question is where is that minor's team, coaches, parents, friends, league administrators and directors? There are many volunteer parents that help with the teams. Will all of them be investigated? After all, do they not come in constant contact with children other than their own and carry the weight of authority?

Let's step to the other side of the issue. Who determines what is inappropriate and what is not? Think about it. In a certain part of the country, a businessman/woman responds to a certain act, "Come on, honey, you can do better then that" it is completely acceptable, and in some societal communities, expected! Bring that same scenario to a big-city, up-tight suburban community and those individuals are terminated, shunned by former "friends" and can completely lose their lifestyle just because they were acting in a manner which is considered not only acceptable, but friendly.

Again, under who's societal laws will the line be drawn? Who makes the determination of who is good and who is bad? Hasn't this country learned from Sen. Joe McCarthy that people cannot be trusted to be honorable, even-handed and fair when it comes to highly sensitive and devisive issues?

And once this information is collected, who will police it's use? Do you have enough faith in people, especially those who volunteer for such a task, that it will held in strict confidence and not used beyond a predescribed limit? If you do, let's talk about Arlen Specter's (didn't he work with Sen. McCarthy?) magic bullet theory, RICO laws only applying to racketeering and organized crime, the CIA not running black ops out of Laos and Cambodia and a bridge in Brooklyn.

Cynical? Yep, things like this and the resulting abuse of percieved authority have caused me to be that way

IMO, I believe this is another Chicken Little reaction that is nothing more than a non-productive, feel-good invasion and insinuation of our community.

That said, I have changed my strategy. If this is ever presented, instead of walking away, I will fight this however I may. I'm sure there will be a loss of friendship and trust, but I just don't believe in living our lives in such a manner to quell the fears of others who choose to lack the ability to take responsibility for their charge.

JMHO,

Mike