Yes, hitch hiking is very dangerous. So dangerous that that dude should never have left his Corps Sistah in that truck with that trucker. That's exactly how one of our sweet Corps sisters was violently raped. Her hitching partner, the GUY, did the exact same thing. I would never ever do that. I'd say; "Mary Jane (or whoever), I have to take a leak. Come on with me and wait in the coffee shop".
L. Craig Martindale and his woman partner were hitchhicking to TFI. Near Oklahoma City, at a truck stop..... he and this corps woman were trying to find another ride to California. At approximately the same time, he found a trucker who offered to take them westward and the corps woman found a ride also.
L. Craig Martindale, in his arrogant competitive nature, said "Well then, you take your ride and I'll take mine and I'll see you at TFI." Martindale DESERTED this woman and never gave it a second thought.
Thankfully, (but no thanks to Martindale's reckless stupidity) they both made it to TFI safely...........this corps woman later became my wife.
The LEAD evaluation should NOT have been weighed as the prime indicator of a corps person's spirituality and commitment level. C'mon, having a 60 year old Family Corps woman measured in the same manner of a 19 year old athletic man is absurd. Everything from back pain to blisters on her feet could easily affect her performance, her mood, her "positive" outlook, her willingness to help around the campfire, etc.
To me, it's NOT whether someone had a good experience and another had a bad experience.....
Looking back, I see the heavy-handedness of LEAD/corps leadership to manipulate and degrade some individuals when COMPARING corps against corps. And, we all know that making comparisons amongst one another is not wise.
The LEAD experience can be viewed on so many levels because it was intricately interwoven into the fabric of the competitive corps program.
And exactly WHY was it competitive? What was the logic there? What were we supposed to be competing for?
Don't even try to come up with a good answer there. Some will say, "Life is a competition." I'll just answer, "BULL!"
I just marvel at the difference in how I view the things of God now in comparison to the way I viewed them then.
Yes, Jonny that was what should have been done. I for the life of me can't remember if there was a reproof session reminding hitching teams to NEVER allow themselves to be separated. I do know that we were young and sooooo full of trust - moreso than wisdom.
AND, Doojable. I SPECIFICALLY remember Richard Thomas saying that we should NEVER separate, and that we should ALWAYS keep going forward down the road, no matter what. I don't know where you were, but I know for a fact that the guy who left our Sister in that truck quite specifically broke that RULE of common sense, and that RULE that Richard T specifically told us from the start. And so, if you never heard it, I can't help that.
AND, Doojable. I SPECIFICALLY remember Richard Thomas saying that we should NEVER separate, and that we should ALWAYS keep going forward down the road, no matter what. I don't know where you were, but I know for a fact that the guy who left our Sister in that truck quite specifically broke that RULE of common sense, and that RULE that Richard T specifically told us from the start. And so, if you never heard it, I can't help that.
Sooooo --- should they have taken their backpacks/ traveling bags/ whatever/ out ot the truck as well???
Just wondering.
Skyrider told a story that totally contradicts what you're saying here, about lcm and his trip.
I guess the lcm incident must of happened earlier, eh?
Or else (perhaps) lcm didn't hear the *directive* from RT.
Who the heck was RT anyway?? What did he have to do with LEAD???
Was he a *somebody* that lcm might have listened to about this *non-separation* thing,
or was he a later lackey of lcm and docvic who thought they could do no evil, see no evil, etc.??
The ARROGANCE of the top leader$h!t dictating to the *lowest common denominator* (i.e. --- read corps and other believers), is (now) astounding to me, given all the CRAP they managed to pawn off on us, get away with it, and we bought it hook, line, and sinker.
Docvic shoulda been told to stick out his thumb whenever he wanted to go *bless the believers*,
in say -- Indiana.
(I'm gonna make this easier for him than he did for others).
How willing do you think he would've been to take Dotsie on the road, and hop in a strange truck?
She probably had more sense than he did, and would have refused.
Shucks -- she probably woulda told him that was a dangerous way to travel.
Just because some BOZO (RT or whomever) mandated a law/ guideline about LEAD ---
doesn't amount to a hill of beans when it comes down to individual responsibility,
when someone is *out on the field*.
My opinion about Hdqtrs and their *directives??? ---
A) Was it a good idea to REQUIRE hitch-hiking in a program?
B) Once the dangers were encountered, was it a good idea to CONTINUE to REQUIRE hitch-hiking in a program?
A.) No. I already said that long ago. Read the thread.
B.) No. But since I already said that there should not have been a requirement for it in the first place, your question "B" is moot. It never should have been a requirement in the first place. Once again, read the thread.
DMiller asked:
Who the heck was RT anyway?? What did he have to do with LEAD???
He was our Corps coordinator, along with Linda MacDuffy. He is the one who called our names out to go LEAD. And he is the one who gave us his rap on safety, and etc. RT was a United States Marine (once a Marine always a Marine), and was a pretty logical guy, IMO. And, I mentioned him without an explanation as to who he was because I was responding specifically to Doojable, who knew him as I did. Sorry I didn't clarify. I think RT was in the 5th Corps. I liked him. He was a no nonsense guy. Many in my Corps didn't like him. But many did also. Unfortunately, LCM was there at Emporia for the first six months of our first year, and RT had to live under the "watchful eye" of Craig, which no doubt hampered RT's style. But we all know how dominating LCM was.
AND, Doojable. I SPECIFICALLY remember Richard Thomas saying that we should NEVER separate, and that we should ALWAYS keep going forward down the road, no matter what. I don't know where you were, but I know for a fact that the guy who left our Sister in that truck quite specifically broke that RULE of common sense, and that RULE that Richard T specifically told us from the start. And so, if you never heard it, I can't help that.
Hey Jonny! I most likely heard it - but I just don't remember it. I don't remember everything that happened almost 30 years ago like it was yesterday.
I was making an observation - not being a smart a$$....
Yes, It was and still is common sense. All the more evidence that we were so young and full of trust and not wisdom. I'm not saying that we trusted our leaders to teach us everything - but we sure did take a lot of risks thinking, "OH God will cover..." We trusted in ourselves.
Yes, Jonny that was what should have been done. I for the life of me can't remember if there was a reproof session reminding hitching teams to NEVER allow themselves to be separated. I do know that we were young and sooooo full of trust - moreso than wisdom.
thank god the sweet girl got help, counseling, etc., when she got back
But she didn't EXcie, and it was a crime. I tried to talk to her once, but it seemed as if she wasn't having much to do with men at that time. Can't blame her for that. She didn't seem to want to talk to anybody. Can't blame her for that either. But, I would never have let those guys hurt her like that. Women have been predated upon since time immemorial in that manner, and when on the road, your woman/woman friend/daughter should be treated as if she were a snowy colored bunny rabbit with wolves about waiting to devour her. And she should never be left alone. Anyway, f all this. I am tired of arguing with you all.
I am glad to have had many conversations with this same gal in the last couple of years in PMs and am so thankful to have learned that she has been able to come back to a life of relative normalcy and considers herself to be on top of the world. She is my friend, and doesn't regard me as a sick cave man.
I'm always hesitant to comment on matters that concern tragedy but, having seen your link and read up to the point of where HCW actually speaks of what happened I feel compelled to say I see no justification for blaming the LEAD program or TWI for the accident. The driver of the car was just being plain stupid and I don't think anyone -- including God -- can be blamed for stupidity.
My thinking runs differently than yours on this incident.
I shall elaborate.
First of all, I shall agree with you on one particular: the driver of the vehicle is responsible for the safe
operation of the vehicle he is operating. Therefore, the driver, in this case, is at least partly to blame.
Now, let's look at the conditions BEFORE the driver enters the picture.
A) twi REQUIRES the LEAD trip.
The participants agreed to be in the corps, and did not choose to quit rather than face
LEAD. They were adults and that was their choice.
B) twi REQUIRES the specifics they lay out be followed.
The participants were adults, and did not choose to quit rather than face LEAD.
C) twi provides-for the transport of humans- one truck with a homemade hitch,
and any SENSIBLE source on traffic safety would tell you that the hitch is unsuitable for human transport,
since there is ZERO protection of the passengers WHATSOEVER.
There are no SEATS, no SEATBELTS, no AIRBAGS, not even things to hold onto.
The structure is not designed to minimize injuries should there be an accident.
Even an outdated schoolbus provides MUCH better protection- with supported seats,
things to hold onto, and a frame that will take impacts if needed.
(They're SUPPOSED to have seatbelts, which can be added of course.)
So, to begin with, this is an unsafe vehicle to operate under even IDEAL conditions.
(It's also illegal.)
The sensible-and safe-thing to do is for the driver to refuse to transport people
under these conditions.
Therefore, the driver is partly to blame for agreeing to drive this deathtrap.
Furthermore, the people who agreed to climb into the coffin on wheels are adults,
and partly to blame for agreeing to ride in a deathtrap.
D) twi required that their artificial timeframe-determined solely by them-
be followed regardless of any extenuating circumstances,
like inclement weather or road closings.
The twi-mandated time REQUIRED unsafe speed be used with this vehicle-
even if the vehicle was safe.
(As most drivers know, you can maintain more control of the vehicle by
REDUCING SPEED- which means you relinquish some control and increase
risk with a vehicle of this type by INCREASING SPEED, which was required.)
The driver, knowing this speed was unsafe, agreed to drive at it. That was his fault.
E) the weather, as the weather reports predicted, included HEAVY WINDS.
That's not good for ANY vehicle, and for a hitch, that's doubly so.
twi required travel at speed regardless of the weather.
The driver, knowing this weather was unsafe, agreed to drive in it. That was his fault.
F) twi required that evaluations be completed within the timeframe they set,
which provided insufficient time to complete them.
The driver, knowing it was unsafe, began to try to complete them behind the
wheel. That was his fault.
===========
If all those things were the faults of the driver and participants,
why do some of us insist that twi was responsible?
As you can easily see, everything except the heavy wind were within the control of twi.
By running this program, twi had legally accepted a fiduciary responsibility to execute
this program in a fashion that minimized the risks to the participants.
That included controlling what they COULD control, and making a good-faith attempt
to reduce risks where it was reasonable to do so.
As most of us see it, they had several chances to reduce the risk in this situation-
and were criminally negligent and morally negligent to the degree they did not.
twi did not need to require the LEAD trip in the first place. Having required it,
twi chose to send participants to travel in an obviously-unsafe vehicle.
twi chose to require an artificial timeframe to take precedence over OBVIOUS
SAFETY ISSUES (unsafe driving conditions.)
Thus, if twi was exercising even AVERAGE safety precautions, I see no way the
people would even BE in a trailer hitch-and certainly not in one when the weather
was less than ideal for travel.
To the average neutral observer, that's gross incompetence. And that's twi's fault.
===========
Now then,
what about the fault of the participants and driver?
They're all adults and could refuse what sensible people would see as dangerous risks.
That is true-but not the whole truth.
Great social pressures and social stigmas were brought to bear on anyone who dared to
question the soundness of twi decisions in the corps.
If you chose to save your own neck rather than lay it under the headman's axe when
a corps leader said to, you were subjected to "face-melting sessions", stigmatized,
and thrown out if they were in a bad mood. However, sufficient groveling sometimes
meant they allowed you to return.
If those people had exercised the brains that God gave them, they would have been
seen as scum, as dirt, as algae, in the eyes of the corps- and therefore in the eyes
of God's people, as they were instructed to think. Furthermore, they had already
been portrayed as washouts, and that leadership was looking for excuses to
can them. All of that meant that sensible precautions become a secondary consideration
when all of that is on the line. No, they HAD a choice to leave the corps when it came
down to that- so long as they were willing to accept the corps pronouncement of judgement
on them that they were failures and dirt in the eyes of God. That WAS a choice.
However, twi was responsible for putting them in the position to make such a
horrible either-or decision.
======
BTW,
this is a long post.
Despite that, it has substance. Some people will have no difficulty seeing that.
A.) No. I already said that long ago. Read the thread.
B.) No. But since I already said that there should not have been a requirement for it in the first place, your question "B" is moot. It never should have been a requirement in the first place. Once again, read the thread.
Thanks for answering.
Across the various pages, I lost track of WHICH posts were yours,
so I had read them, but hadn't kept track that they were yours.
Skyrider told a story that totally contradicts what you're saying here, about lcm and his trip.
I guess the lcm incident must of happened earlier, eh?
Or else (perhaps) lcm didn't hear the *directive* from RT.
Who the heck was RT anyway?? What did he have to do with LEAD???
Was he a *somebody* that lcm might have listened to about this *non-separation* thing,
or was he a later lackey of lcm and docvic who thought they could do no evil, see no evil, etc.??
The lcm incident was three years earlier.
Of course, martindale never offered up his little brain-dead incident to teach "what NOT to do".......but rather, unloaded screaming reproof regarding small areas of oversight of later corps partners.
Of course, martindale never offered up his little brain-dead incident to teach "what NOT to do".......but rather, unloaded screaming reproof regarding small areas of oversight of later corps partners.
How typical of him.
The first kidnapping incident that I know of, happened in the first year of the 6th Corps, in 1975-76.
That should have been enough to prove to anyone that hitch hiking is too dangerous to be a requirement for anyone.
VPW chose to continue the practice anyway. And when despite warnings to not abandon your partner, people did it anyway and MORE rapes occurred, TWI STILL refused to discontinue the practice.
Pure and simple negligience.
Time, and time again.
I am so happy for the several people who had "good" experiences while hitch hiking and going LEAD, TFI, or "Camping," as they did in the 6th Corps.
But how many cases of negligience do you have to see in an organization, before you can admit to yourself that there is a problem with the organization itself, not the people participating in it?
The answer? I think that they just didn`t give a damn about people. WE were a disposable commodity. Something to be used and when every last bit of usefullness had been wrung from us, tossed away like so much trash.
What happened to our brothers and sister, the rapes, the injuries, the murder was not a big deal because we easily replaceable.
Does anybody find it ironic how obsessively twi so carefully stewarded and cared for the posessions, the buildings, the grounds, the equipment ...to the point of being rediculously anal...and yet they had so very little regard for the people in their custody and care.
quote: As far as hitch hiking being dangerous, I don't buy that.
I decided to begin reading this thread and only got as far as this, and I just gotta say something: DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On one of my hitching experiences in the Corps, I was stuck in a sports car being driven by a drunk at high rates of speed, praying I'd see the light of day.
One of my Corps sisters was KIDNAPPED while hitching, when her buddy left the truck to go to the bathroom and the trucker took off with her.
Not dangerous?
Buddy, what planet do you live on, and in what century?
This is just another microcosm of my relationship to GSC. I've probably hitched more than all of you put together. I know that George Aar and the Evan have put in some time hitching, but for the most part, it was pretty cool. I found that having a guitar, a pet, and/or a woman with you increased the chances of getting a ride quickly. Most people just want someone to talk to, or possibly drive for them.
Yeah, one bad ride has the potential to ruin everything but just like other stuff frequently complained about on GSC, nothing much bad ever happened to me. I once hitched from MI to CA in 2 days and 11 hours. The last time I did it though was to the ROA in '84. Had someone's WOW money with me so of course God made sure I got there OK. I was coming from STL and it took me much of Thursday night to get across the river into Illinois, but I got a ride from about 20 miles into IL all the way to the ROA in plenty of time to get the guy his money. Why does one exception have to be the rule?
I am glad to have had many conversations with this same gal in the last couple of years in PMs and am so thankful to have learned that she has been able to come back to a life of relative normalcy and considers herself to be on top of the world. She is my friend, and doesn't regard me as a sick cave man.
I never called you a caveman. I dont' regard you as a sick cave man. I don't agree with how you say some things and you don't agree with how I say some things. These are the type of differences that would be worked out rather easily if we were talking face to face.
That being said, with all the rules of common sense in place lives were still damaged. Not once, not twice, but many times.
Many of us were young and "full of pi$$ and vinegar for the Lord." That may be why some rules of common sense were ignored. Remember Jonny, that you had already been a merchant marine by the time you entered the Corps - you had street smarts that others didn't have. TOO MANY others didn't obey these common sense rules.
quote: As far as hitch hiking being dangerous, I don't buy that.
I decided to begin reading this thread and only got as far as this, and I just gotta say something: DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On one of my hitching experiences in the Corps, I was stuck in a sports car being driven by a drunk at high rates of speed, praying I'd see the light of day.
One of my Corps sisters was KIDNAPPED while hitching, when her buddy left the truck to go to the bathroom and the trucker took off with her.
Not dangerous?
Buddy, what planet do you live on, and in what century?
This is just another microcosm of my relationship to GSC. I've probably hitched more than all of you put together. I know that George Aar and the Evan have put in some time hitching, but for the most part, it was pretty cool. I found that having a guitar, a pet, and/or a woman with you increased the chances of getting a ride quickly. Most people just want someone to talk to, or possibly drive for them.
Yeah, one bad ride has the potential to ruin everything but just like other stuff frequently complained about on GSC, nothing much bad ever happened to me. I once hitched from MI to CA in 2 days and 11 hours. The last time I did it though was to the ROA in '84. Had someone's WOW money with me so of course God made sure I got there OK. I was coming from STL and it took me much of Thursday night to get across the river into Illinois, but I got a ride from about 20 miles into IL all the way to the ROA in plenty of time to get the guy his money. Why does one exception have to be the rule?
I don't think just one exception has been offerred here.
If the poll was put to the entire country in general, I believe you would find MOST people in the United States would disagree with you that hitch hiking is a safe practice.
Here's a good reason not to hitchhike-----------IT'S ILLEGAL!
It has been for as long as I can remember( at least where I grew up in Ohio.)
Wierwille and his cronies were from Ohio.
Surely it must have come to their attention at some point that they were asking people to do something illegal.
I hitched extensively as a kid.(Even though it was illegal.)
Probably no less than 10 or 15 times a week.
I knew people who got robbed and beat up.
That didn't stop me.
I was in a car that picked me up that was in an accident.
That didn't stop me.
I knew someone who got a ride from Cleveland to L.A.
That encouraged me.
Did I continue to hitch because I believed God would cover for me?
Heck no, this was pre-TWI.
I continued because I was a foolish kid who thought he was invincible.
One night, after I started going to twig, I had a potentially life ending experience as I hitched.
I managed to come out of it OK and it prompted me to SIT out loud, for the very first time, right there on a public street, at the top of my voice to give praise to GOD for my deliverance.
Is the glass half full or half empty?
I could have been killed ---But!---- I spoke in tongues for the first time.
There's a reason it's against the law.
It doesn't take a Biblical Scholar to figure out what that reason is.
Never went on LEAD. Went to TFI, it's precursor. My wife and I together, we hitch hiked. I wouldn't recommend hitch hiking to anyone today, other than an emergency. I think it was ill advised at that time too, after doing it.
TFI itself had some good things about it but there were qualities that ran through the whole training class that weakened it IMO. Overall most people liked it, supported it, because most people liked John S-----ville, who I liked too. And he had some good people working with him I thought. But they were - looking for the words here - "shot loose", kinda loosely packed as a unit. Things happened that no one was immediately aware of, and response wasn't effective as a result.
Focus - that's the word, the focus wasn't clear. And in fact, it was being evaluated when we went. What was the benefit of such a program?
The focus emphasized team development, through individual training, is how I would describe it. But the progress of the whole group determined how well a person could get trained and develop. In other words, it was like a "climb" - if you had to stop, the group stopped, but it moved fairly quickly to having to force individuals to push on regardless of their capacity. To fall behind, drop back or behind wasn't evaluated properly, IMO. Some people would need more time and simply wouldn't get it, they had to push on in whatever the exercise was.
Which might sound typical of these kinds of "extreme" personal development programs, but I don't think it works very well, short or long term. I did fine overall and felt I got some good things out of it but the cost on all levels didn't warrant the benefits, IMO. While I did have some experience I value even today, I could have gotten it other ways and been better trained in the process.
This came to a head after completion of the program, when we turned in written evaluations. I still have my journal, believe it or not. There's quite a few comments in it about wonderful things the TFI employees did, and good experiences, but overall I didn't feel the program warranted sending everyone off packing for two weeks to California from Ohio. I wasn't the only one who felt that way. The VPster didn't seem sold on it either, but they tried it a couple more times.
In the two weeks or so, I got in great physical shape, but I was young too, mid - 20's. I learned some climbing techniqiues, hiking stuff, how to build a fire from scratch, etc. etc. I was able to determine my fear of heights more clearly. I've always had a right/left thing going and to this day can feel like I'm on the "wrong" side of a room going in, or a couch when I sit down and will get up and switch. Things in a room can seem mis-placed in their positions. I may feel like I have to be on the left of something or someone, occasionally the right. There's a physical reason for it, and I came to realize it more clearly in the climbs and and worked on how to handle it.
I lost track of what LEAD was all about, other than what was said in the meetings and print stuff the Way put out, but it apparently somebody felt it was a good idea, enough to keep it going. And once it got going, I doubt VPW responded well to criticism of it and the various coordinators may have kept it from him and filtered their feedback to reflect their own agenda. So it took on a life of it's own. ?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
13
10
26
17
Popular Days
Jul 21
53
Jul 19
35
Jul 20
33
Jul 22
30
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 13 posts
Out There 10 posts
J0nny Ling0 26 posts
doojable 17 posts
Popular Days
Jul 21 2007
53 posts
Jul 19 2007
35 posts
Jul 20 2007
33 posts
Jul 22 2007
30 posts
skyrider
L. Craig Martindale and his woman partner were hitchhicking to TFI. Near Oklahoma City, at a truck stop..... he and this corps woman were trying to find another ride to California. At approximately the same time, he found a trucker who offered to take them westward and the corps woman found a ride also.
L. Craig Martindale, in his arrogant competitive nature, said "Well then, you take your ride and I'll take mine and I'll see you at TFI." Martindale DESERTED this woman and never gave it a second thought.
Thankfully, (but no thanks to Martindale's reckless stupidity) they both made it to TFI safely...........this corps woman later became my wife.
And, Martindale later became the corps director.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
no kidding sky !
--
hey did veepee every leave his hitching partner ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
And exactly WHY was it competitive? What was the logic there? What were we supposed to be competing for?
Don't even try to come up with a good answer there. Some will say, "Life is a competition." I'll just answer, "BULL!"
I just marvel at the difference in how I view the things of God now in comparison to the way I viewed them then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
AND, Doojable. I SPECIFICALLY remember Richard Thomas saying that we should NEVER separate, and that we should ALWAYS keep going forward down the road, no matter what. I don't know where you were, but I know for a fact that the guy who left our Sister in that truck quite specifically broke that RULE of common sense, and that RULE that Richard T specifically told us from the start. And so, if you never heard it, I can't help that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Granting that as true,
AND that "hitch-hiking is very dangerous",
A) Was it a good idea to REQUIRE hitch-hiking in a program?
B) Once the dangers were encountered, was it a good idea to CONTINUE to REQUIRE hitch-hiking in a program?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Sooooo --- should they have taken their backpacks/ traveling bags/ whatever/ out ot the truck as well???
Just wondering.
Skyrider told a story that totally contradicts what you're saying here, about lcm and his trip.
I guess the lcm incident must of happened earlier, eh?
Or else (perhaps) lcm didn't hear the *directive* from RT.
Who the heck was RT anyway?? What did he have to do with LEAD???
Was he a *somebody* that lcm might have listened to about this *non-separation* thing,
or was he a later lackey of lcm and docvic who thought they could do no evil, see no evil, etc.??
The ARROGANCE of the top leader$h!t dictating to the *lowest common denominator* (i.e. --- read corps and other believers), is (now) astounding to me, given all the CRAP they managed to pawn off on us, get away with it, and we bought it hook, line, and sinker.
Docvic shoulda been told to stick out his thumb whenever he wanted to go *bless the believers*,
in say -- Indiana.
(I'm gonna make this easier for him than he did for others).
How willing do you think he would've been to take Dotsie on the road, and hop in a strange truck?
She probably had more sense than he did, and would have refused.
Shucks -- she probably woulda told him that was a dangerous way to travel.
Just because some BOZO (RT or whomever) mandated a law/ guideline about LEAD ---
doesn't amount to a hill of beans when it comes down to individual responsibility,
when someone is *out on the field*.
My opinion about Hdqtrs and their *directives??? ---
Nuff said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
B.) No. But since I already said that there should not have been a requirement for it in the first place, your question "B" is moot. It never should have been a requirement in the first place. Once again, read the thread.
DMiller asked:
He was our Corps coordinator, along with Linda MacDuffy. He is the one who called our names out to go LEAD. And he is the one who gave us his rap on safety, and etc. RT was a United States Marine (once a Marine always a Marine), and was a pretty logical guy, IMO. And, I mentioned him without an explanation as to who he was because I was responding specifically to Doojable, who knew him as I did. Sorry I didn't clarify. I think RT was in the 5th Corps. I liked him. He was a no nonsense guy. Many in my Corps didn't like him. But many did also. Unfortunately, LCM was there at Emporia for the first six months of our first year, and RT had to live under the "watchful eye" of Craig, which no doubt hampered RT's style. But we all know how dominating LCM was.
Edited by Jonny LingoLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Hey Jonny! I most likely heard it - but I just don't remember it. I don't remember everything that happened almost 30 years ago like it was yesterday.
I was making an observation - not being a smart a$$....
Yes, It was and still is common sense. All the more evidence that we were so young and full of trust and not wisdom. I'm not saying that we trusted our leaders to teach us everything - but we sure did take a lot of risks thinking, "OH God will cover..." We trusted in ourselves.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
But she didn't EXcie, and it was a crime. I tried to talk to her once, but it seemed as if she wasn't having much to do with men at that time. Can't blame her for that. She didn't seem to want to talk to anybody. Can't blame her for that either. But, I would never have let those guys hurt her like that. Women have been predated upon since time immemorial in that manner, and when on the road, your woman/woman friend/daughter should be treated as if she were a snowy colored bunny rabbit with wolves about waiting to devour her. And she should never be left alone. Anyway, f all this. I am tired of arguing with you all.
I am glad to have had many conversations with this same gal in the last couple of years in PMs and am so thankful to have learned that she has been able to come back to a life of relative normalcy and considers herself to be on top of the world. She is my friend, and doesn't regard me as a sick cave man.
Edited by Jonny LingoLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Heck, I wasn't even arguing....I was trying to remember.
Not every disagreement is an argument. Sometimes a difference of opinion is only a difference of opinion.
I'll look at this again in the morning...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
My thinking runs differently than yours on this incident.
I shall elaborate.
First of all, I shall agree with you on one particular: the driver of the vehicle is responsible for the safe
operation of the vehicle he is operating. Therefore, the driver, in this case, is at least partly to blame.
Now, let's look at the conditions BEFORE the driver enters the picture.
A) twi REQUIRES the LEAD trip.
The participants agreed to be in the corps, and did not choose to quit rather than face
LEAD. They were adults and that was their choice.
B) twi REQUIRES the specifics they lay out be followed.
The participants were adults, and did not choose to quit rather than face LEAD.
C) twi provides-for the transport of humans- one truck with a homemade hitch,
and any SENSIBLE source on traffic safety would tell you that the hitch is unsuitable for human transport,
since there is ZERO protection of the passengers WHATSOEVER.
There are no SEATS, no SEATBELTS, no AIRBAGS, not even things to hold onto.
The structure is not designed to minimize injuries should there be an accident.
Even an outdated schoolbus provides MUCH better protection- with supported seats,
things to hold onto, and a frame that will take impacts if needed.
(They're SUPPOSED to have seatbelts, which can be added of course.)
So, to begin with, this is an unsafe vehicle to operate under even IDEAL conditions.
(It's also illegal.)
The sensible-and safe-thing to do is for the driver to refuse to transport people
under these conditions.
Therefore, the driver is partly to blame for agreeing to drive this deathtrap.
Furthermore, the people who agreed to climb into the coffin on wheels are adults,
and partly to blame for agreeing to ride in a deathtrap.
D) twi required that their artificial timeframe-determined solely by them-
be followed regardless of any extenuating circumstances,
like inclement weather or road closings.
The twi-mandated time REQUIRED unsafe speed be used with this vehicle-
even if the vehicle was safe.
(As most drivers know, you can maintain more control of the vehicle by
REDUCING SPEED- which means you relinquish some control and increase
risk with a vehicle of this type by INCREASING SPEED, which was required.)
The driver, knowing this speed was unsafe, agreed to drive at it. That was his fault.
E) the weather, as the weather reports predicted, included HEAVY WINDS.
That's not good for ANY vehicle, and for a hitch, that's doubly so.
twi required travel at speed regardless of the weather.
The driver, knowing this weather was unsafe, agreed to drive in it. That was his fault.
F) twi required that evaluations be completed within the timeframe they set,
which provided insufficient time to complete them.
The driver, knowing it was unsafe, began to try to complete them behind the
wheel. That was his fault.
===========
If all those things were the faults of the driver and participants,
why do some of us insist that twi was responsible?
As you can easily see, everything except the heavy wind were within the control of twi.
By running this program, twi had legally accepted a fiduciary responsibility to execute
this program in a fashion that minimized the risks to the participants.
That included controlling what they COULD control, and making a good-faith attempt
to reduce risks where it was reasonable to do so.
As most of us see it, they had several chances to reduce the risk in this situation-
and were criminally negligent and morally negligent to the degree they did not.
twi did not need to require the LEAD trip in the first place. Having required it,
twi chose to send participants to travel in an obviously-unsafe vehicle.
twi chose to require an artificial timeframe to take precedence over OBVIOUS
SAFETY ISSUES (unsafe driving conditions.)
Thus, if twi was exercising even AVERAGE safety precautions, I see no way the
people would even BE in a trailer hitch-and certainly not in one when the weather
was less than ideal for travel.
To the average neutral observer, that's gross incompetence. And that's twi's fault.
===========
Now then,
what about the fault of the participants and driver?
They're all adults and could refuse what sensible people would see as dangerous risks.
That is true-but not the whole truth.
Great social pressures and social stigmas were brought to bear on anyone who dared to
question the soundness of twi decisions in the corps.
If you chose to save your own neck rather than lay it under the headman's axe when
a corps leader said to, you were subjected to "face-melting sessions", stigmatized,
and thrown out if they were in a bad mood. However, sufficient groveling sometimes
meant they allowed you to return.
If those people had exercised the brains that God gave them, they would have been
seen as scum, as dirt, as algae, in the eyes of the corps- and therefore in the eyes
of God's people, as they were instructed to think. Furthermore, they had already
been portrayed as washouts, and that leadership was looking for excuses to
can them. All of that meant that sensible precautions become a secondary consideration
when all of that is on the line. No, they HAD a choice to leave the corps when it came
down to that- so long as they were willing to accept the corps pronouncement of judgement
on them that they were failures and dirt in the eyes of God. That WAS a choice.
However, twi was responsible for putting them in the position to make such a
horrible either-or decision.
======
BTW,
this is a long post.
Despite that, it has substance. Some people will have no difficulty seeing that.
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Thanks for answering.
Across the various pages, I lost track of WHICH posts were yours,
so I had read them, but hadn't kept track that they were yours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
The lcm incident was three years earlier.
Of course, martindale never offered up his little brain-dead incident to teach "what NOT to do".......but rather, unloaded screaming reproof regarding small areas of oversight of later corps partners.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
How typical of him.
The first kidnapping incident that I know of, happened in the first year of the 6th Corps, in 1975-76.
That should have been enough to prove to anyone that hitch hiking is too dangerous to be a requirement for anyone.
VPW chose to continue the practice anyway. And when despite warnings to not abandon your partner, people did it anyway and MORE rapes occurred, TWI STILL refused to discontinue the practice.
Pure and simple negligience.
Time, and time again.
I am so happy for the several people who had "good" experiences while hitch hiking and going LEAD, TFI, or "Camping," as they did in the 6th Corps.
But how many cases of negligience do you have to see in an organization, before you can admit to yourself that there is a problem with the organization itself, not the people participating in it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Danny
I think if we ask the money question we will
get the answer.
Cheap
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
The answer? I think that they just didn`t give a damn about people. WE were a disposable commodity. Something to be used and when every last bit of usefullness had been wrung from us, tossed away like so much trash.
What happened to our brothers and sister, the rapes, the injuries, the murder was not a big deal because we easily replaceable.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Does anybody find it ironic how obsessively twi so carefully stewarded and cared for the posessions, the buildings, the grounds, the equipment ...to the point of being rediculously anal...and yet they had so very little regard for the people in their custody and care.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: As far as hitch hiking being dangerous, I don't buy that.
I decided to begin reading this thread and only got as far as this, and I just gotta say something: DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On one of my hitching experiences in the Corps, I was stuck in a sports car being driven by a drunk at high rates of speed, praying I'd see the light of day.
One of my Corps sisters was KIDNAPPED while hitching, when her buddy left the truck to go to the bathroom and the trucker took off with her.
Not dangerous?
Buddy, what planet do you live on, and in what century?
This is just another microcosm of my relationship to GSC. I've probably hitched more than all of you put together. I know that George Aar and the Evan have put in some time hitching, but for the most part, it was pretty cool. I found that having a guitar, a pet, and/or a woman with you increased the chances of getting a ride quickly. Most people just want someone to talk to, or possibly drive for them.
Yeah, one bad ride has the potential to ruin everything but just like other stuff frequently complained about on GSC, nothing much bad ever happened to me. I once hitched from MI to CA in 2 days and 11 hours. The last time I did it though was to the ROA in '84. Had someone's WOW money with me so of course God made sure I got there OK. I was coming from STL and it took me much of Thursday night to get across the river into Illinois, but I got a ride from about 20 miles into IL all the way to the ROA in plenty of time to get the guy his money. Why does one exception have to be the rule?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
I never called you a caveman. I dont' regard you as a sick cave man. I don't agree with how you say some things and you don't agree with how I say some things. These are the type of differences that would be worked out rather easily if we were talking face to face.
That being said, with all the rules of common sense in place lives were still damaged. Not once, not twice, but many times.
Many of us were young and "full of pi$$ and vinegar for the Lord." That may be why some rules of common sense were ignored. Remember Jonny, that you had already been a merchant marine by the time you entered the Corps - you had street smarts that others didn't have. TOO MANY others didn't obey these common sense rules.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
I don't think just one exception has been offerred here.
If the poll was put to the entire country in general, I believe you would find MOST people in the United States would disagree with you that hitch hiking is a safe practice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Here's a good reason not to hitchhike-----------IT'S ILLEGAL!
It has been for as long as I can remember( at least where I grew up in Ohio.)
Wierwille and his cronies were from Ohio.
Surely it must have come to their attention at some point that they were asking people to do something illegal.
I hitched extensively as a kid.(Even though it was illegal.)
Probably no less than 10 or 15 times a week.
I knew people who got robbed and beat up.
That didn't stop me.
I was in a car that picked me up that was in an accident.
That didn't stop me.
I knew someone who got a ride from Cleveland to L.A.
That encouraged me.
Did I continue to hitch because I believed God would cover for me?
Heck no, this was pre-TWI.
I continued because I was a foolish kid who thought he was invincible.
One night, after I started going to twig, I had a potentially life ending experience as I hitched.
I managed to come out of it OK and it prompted me to SIT out loud, for the very first time, right there on a public street, at the top of my voice to give praise to GOD for my deliverance.
Is the glass half full or half empty?
I could have been killed ---But!---- I spoke in tongues for the first time.
There's a reason it's against the law.
It doesn't take a Biblical Scholar to figure out what that reason is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
One bad ride? Only one rape? just one murder? just a single accident???
That tends to be a pretty big deal when your life is the one impacted by twi`s lack of consideration for even the most basic of safety measures.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
24 killed at Outward Bound.
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventur...ward-bound.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Never went on LEAD. Went to TFI, it's precursor. My wife and I together, we hitch hiked. I wouldn't recommend hitch hiking to anyone today, other than an emergency. I think it was ill advised at that time too, after doing it.
TFI itself had some good things about it but there were qualities that ran through the whole training class that weakened it IMO. Overall most people liked it, supported it, because most people liked John S-----ville, who I liked too. And he had some good people working with him I thought. But they were - looking for the words here - "shot loose", kinda loosely packed as a unit. Things happened that no one was immediately aware of, and response wasn't effective as a result.
Focus - that's the word, the focus wasn't clear. And in fact, it was being evaluated when we went. What was the benefit of such a program?
The focus emphasized team development, through individual training, is how I would describe it. But the progress of the whole group determined how well a person could get trained and develop. In other words, it was like a "climb" - if you had to stop, the group stopped, but it moved fairly quickly to having to force individuals to push on regardless of their capacity. To fall behind, drop back or behind wasn't evaluated properly, IMO. Some people would need more time and simply wouldn't get it, they had to push on in whatever the exercise was.
Which might sound typical of these kinds of "extreme" personal development programs, but I don't think it works very well, short or long term. I did fine overall and felt I got some good things out of it but the cost on all levels didn't warrant the benefits, IMO. While I did have some experience I value even today, I could have gotten it other ways and been better trained in the process.
This came to a head after completion of the program, when we turned in written evaluations. I still have my journal, believe it or not. There's quite a few comments in it about wonderful things the TFI employees did, and good experiences, but overall I didn't feel the program warranted sending everyone off packing for two weeks to California from Ohio. I wasn't the only one who felt that way. The VPster didn't seem sold on it either, but they tried it a couple more times.
In the two weeks or so, I got in great physical shape, but I was young too, mid - 20's. I learned some climbing techniqiues, hiking stuff, how to build a fire from scratch, etc. etc. I was able to determine my fear of heights more clearly. I've always had a right/left thing going and to this day can feel like I'm on the "wrong" side of a room going in, or a couch when I sit down and will get up and switch. Things in a room can seem mis-placed in their positions. I may feel like I have to be on the left of something or someone, occasionally the right. There's a physical reason for it, and I came to realize it more clearly in the climbs and and worked on how to handle it.
I lost track of what LEAD was all about, other than what was said in the meetings and print stuff the Way put out, but it apparently somebody felt it was a good idea, enough to keep it going. And once it got going, I doubt VPW responded well to criticism of it and the various coordinators may have kept it from him and filtered their feedback to reflect their own agenda. So it took on a life of it's own. ?
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.