Beyod Belief-Zero Tolerance

[cody8200]

America is going to hell in a handbasket.

I saw this over at the ootp forums.

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/n...0390856.htm?1c


For those who dont want to go to the link...


The synopsis is:

A 10 year old girl was arrested and handcuffed in class the other day after a teacher found scissors in her backpack....in her fricking backpack! The scissors were described by a weapon and immediately the police were called in.


The article:

Scissors get girl in legal trouble

The 10-year-old was handcuffed and taken to a police station after scissors were found in her book bag.

By Susan Snyder

Inquirer Staff Writer


A 10-year-old fourth-grade girl at Holme Elementary School in the Far Northeast was pulled out of class, handcuffed, and taken to the local police station in the back of a police wagon earlier this week after a pair of 8-inch scissors were found in her book bag, according to authorities and her angry mother.

School district and police officials said yesterday that they were following state law and procedures in dealing with students who have weapons on school property. They say that those rules demand police be called and that procedures call for handcuffing suspects regardless of age or crime.

Porsche Brown's mother, Rose Jackson, was outraged.

"My daughter cried and cried," Jackson said yesterday. "She had no idea what she did was wrong. I think that was way too harsh."

Jackson said principal Ethel M. Cabry had known Porsche for four years and should have called her home.

"I want something done to that principal and that teacher. They didn't notify me about my baby. They called the police," Jackson said.

District spokesman Fernando Gallard acknowledged that Cabry had not called Jackson but said that school police called her when they phoned city police.

School district officials acknowledged that the girl was not using the item as a weapon or threatening anyone with it. The scissors were found Thursday morning during a search of students' belongings after something was discovered missing from the teacher's desk area, Gallard said.

The scissors, however, qualified as a possible weapon under a long-standing state law, and the school followed proper procedure by calling city police, he said.

Porsche will be suspended for five days, and the district will then decide whether to expel her to a disciplinary school or allow her to return to Holme, he said.

City police, meanwhile, decided not to charge her with a crime because they determined that she had no intent to use the scissors as a weapon, said Inspector William Colarulo, a police spokesman. In fact, police believe she had the scissors to unwrap a new CD, Colarulo said.

He defended the police officers' decision to handcuff the child and take her to Eighth Police District headquarters. All suspects, regardless of age or crime, are handcuffed, he said. "The officers acted in good faith," he said.

Jackson, who maintained that her daughter had the scissors for a previous school assignment, said that if the district acted based on state law, the law must be changed.

"This should be done per case," based on circumstances. She said her daughter did nothing to warrant police intervention: "She's like, 'Mom, we use scissors in school.' "

My Rant:

After all, the scissors mere presence made it clear that this young woman was a terrorist. Her expulsion from school is no doubt warranted as she is probably trying to infiltrate the other young minds of the elementary school. She is using covert operations to create a terror network that reaches from elementary school to elementary school across the entire nation. We cannot let her infiltrate our young. These scissors are just the start. BTW, this is complete Bullshit!!!!

[MJ4H]

In a lot of these cases, the media doesn't report the whole story. I'm not saying that's the case here, but it could be. For instance, in some past cases, students were actually suspended because they had been asked not to bring the item several times, and then continued doing it anyway. Or maybe the refused to turn over the item when asked. I don't know if these are even possible in this case, I'm just saying the media has been known to conveniently leave out those types of things and make it sound like a student was suspended for having scissors when the suspension was actually for something totally justifiable. I have learned not to jump to conclusions after hearing ONLY a newspaper story, so I will withhold my outrage for now.

[cody8200]

Matt, thats true enough. I hope that is the case, but from the article it sounds like it is not. I just hope this gets picked up nationally and more information comes out.

[illinifan999]

Good to know we're going after these hardened criminals.

[JeeberD]

I thought this was gonna be another thread about our local drama...

[Desnudo]

I have a couple of questions about that story too. Why did she have two pairs of scissors in her pack and secondly they don't mention what was stolen from the teacher. I wouldn't be suprised if it was a couple of pairs of scissors. Additionally, they don't mention if the girl had previous discipline problems which could have led the police to handcuff her and treat her seriously in order to scare some sense into her.

[cody8200]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Additionally, they don't mention if the girl had previous discipline problems which could have led the police to handcuff her and treat her seriously in order to scare some sense into her.

True but her principal said she had known her personally for 4 years making it seem like she hadnt had any problems...It's hard to tell from the info we have.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I have a couple of questions about that story too. Why did she have two pairs of scissors in her pack and secondly they don't mention what was stolen from the teacher. I wouldn't be suprised if it was a couple of pairs of scissors. Additionally, they don't mention if the girl had previous discipline problems which could have led the police to handcuff her and treat her seriously in order to scare some sense into her.

You do realize that "pair of scissors" is singular, right? It's just like "pair of pants."

[Desnudo]

I knew my principal, Mr. Jacobs, very well for the six years I was in elementary school and it wasn't because I was an upstanding citizen. You are right, is very hard to tell from that story what the real deal is. Although it's not unusual in small towns for the police to try and scare kids into behaving properly.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by cody8200

I hope that is the case, but from the article it sounds like it is not.

This ties into the point I was making.

[sterlingice]

Didn't we have a story like this a few months ago?

Oh, and she should be arrested for being named Porche, spelled like the car and not the Shakespearean character (that's Portia, you idiot parents!)

SI

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Axxon

You do realize that "pair of scissors" is singular, right? It's just like "pair of pants."

Apparently I don't. You would fit in well at the police dept. that arrested her.

[JeeberD]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Didn't we have a story like this a few months ago?

Oh, and she should be arrested for being named Porche, spelled like the car and not the Shakespearean character (that's Portia, you idiot parents!)

SI

Hey now...

Porsche...accept no substitute.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by JeeberD

Hey now...

Porsche...accept no substitute.

True, true. I feel like a schmuck now.

Say, to cheer me up, could you get me a Porsche 911? Black with red detailing. Thanks

SI

[SunDancer]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

True, true. I feel like a schmuck now.

Say, to cheer me up, could you get me a Porsche 911? Black with red detailing. Thanks

SI

The Carrera GT makes me drool...

But man, the SUV.......looks like a frog mated with the front of the 911. Stick to making hot sports cars damn company.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I have a couple of questions about that story too. Why did she have two pairs of scissors in her pack and secondly they don't mention what was stolen from the teacher. I wouldn't be suprised if it was a couple of pairs of scissors. Additionally, they don't mention if the girl had previous discipline problems which could have led the police to handcuff her and treat her seriously in order to scare some sense into her.

Yeah I wouldn't read too much into that. The police didn't elect to charge her. They found the scissors during a special search for something else. If the item stolen was scissors, then the school would have listed theft among their charges.

This is simply another case of a zero tolerance tolerance policy trumping common sense. All of these highly paid school administrators, can't be trusted to use their own judgement. I hope some of these parents manage to win a lawsuit or two against these school districts, and in this case the police for handcuffing a crying 10 year old girl. Zero Tolerance is in place to protect these districts and administrators from lawsuits, I think suing the bastards for lack of common sense is the only way to defeat the policy.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

This is simply another case of a zero tolerance tolerance policy trumping common sense. All of these highly paid school administrators, can't be trusted to use their own judgement. I hope some of these parents manage to win a lawsuit or two against these school districts, and in this case the police for handcuffing a crying 10 year old girl. Zero Tolerance is in place to protect these districts and administrators from lawsuits, I think suing the bastards for lack of common sense is the only way to defeat the policy.

But isn't that just adding to the problem? Originally these were put in place because some jackass sued the school because these same admins or someone under their purview didn't act as a rational person, nay, lawyer would 3 months after the fact when he's presenting the case to a jury. So, if you're the school admin- do you create a zero-tolerance policy or pray that your whole school acts with 100% legal rationality 100% of the time. I don't know about you, but as much as I hate them, if I'm in their shoes, I go with the zero-tolerance because there's less liability and because I know that I, much less all of the people under me, don't always act with 100% rationality- it's human nature.

So, given that you can only make one choice: a zero-tolerance policy for getting rid of all scissors even from the kids who don't have to use circles of paper or getting wrongly blamed that you should be able to police the whole school when one of your students goes on the Great Scissors Massacre of '05, what do you do? You can't pick and choose when to apply one and when to apply the other, at least not in this litigious day and age.

Granted, I'll never be in their shoes and I'll be the parent pissed that my kid gets suspended for bringing tweesers to school or whatever. But that's another story for another day.

SI

[SackAttack]

I love that "unreasonable search and seizure" apparently doesn't apply to elementary school kids.

We have constitutional protections against such for alleged criminals, but kids? Nah. They don't need rights.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I love that "unreasonable search and seizure" apparently doesn't apply to elementary school kids.

We have constitutional protections against such for alleged criminals, but kids? Nah. They don't need rights.

That's actually been challenged at the supreme court level and found that it is within a school's right to search student property when they are on campus.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

But isn't that just adding to the problem? Originally these were put in place because some jackass sued the school because these same admins or someone under their purview didn't act as a rational person, nay, lawyer would 3 months after the fact when he's presenting the case to a jury. So, if you're the school admin- do you create a zero-tolerance policy or pray that your whole school acts with 100% legal rationality 100% of the time. I don't know about you, but as much as I hate them, if I'm in their shoes, I go with the zero-tolerance because there's less liability and because I know that I, much less all of the people under me, don't always act with 100% rationality- it's human nature.

So, given that you can only make one choice: a zero-tolerance policy for getting rid of all scissors even from the kids who don't have to use circles of paper or getting wrongly blamed that you should be able to police the whole school when one of your students goes on the Great Scissors Massacre of '05, what do you do? You can't pick and choose when to apply one and when to apply the other, at least not in this litigious day and age.

Granted, I'll never be in their shoes and I'll be the parent pissed that my kid gets suspended for bringing tweesers to school or whatever. But that's another story for another day.

SI

Well IMO zero tolerance is another case of Political Correctness gone amok. Because the real lawsuits they are afraid of, and zero tolerance is trying to avoid are the ones that ask why li'l johnny wanna be gang banger got expelled for wearing a pair of scissors in his belt when the three little white girls have been using scissors to cut out paper dolls during recess for the past three years.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

So let me see if I have this straight. Education is compulsory at the elementary and at least part of the secondary levels. Kids have to be there. And now we've also said that in addition to forcing them to be on the school grounds, their right to privacy is negligible?

A woman can cite the right to privacy to kill a fetus, and the law can't do anything about that, but a child doesn't have control over his or her own freaking backpack, because he's in a place he's required by law to be?

Pretty much, that is why locker searches are admissible as well. Anything found during a blanket or specific locker search can be used not only by the school district to punish a student, but also by authorities to prosecute an offense, say possession of a weapon or drugs.

[SackAttack]

So let me see if I have this straight. Education is compulsory at the elementary and at least part of the secondary levels. Kids have to be there. And now we've also said that in addition to forcing them to be on the school grounds, their right to privacy is negligible?

A woman can cite the right to privacy to kill a fetus, and the law can't do anything about that, but a child doesn't have control over his or her own freaking backpack, because he's in a place he's required by law to be?

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Apparently I don't. You would fit in well at the police dept. that arrested her.

Not really. I was confused when I first read the article and had to reread it for clarity. I thought it was kinda funny that someone else made the same mistake.

Of course, I DID reread it for clarity before I posted...

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Well IMO zero tolerance is another case of Political Correctness gone amok. Because the real lawsuits they are afraid of, and zero tolerance is trying to avoid are the ones that ask why li'l johnny wanna be gang banger got expelled for wearing a pair of scissors in his belt when the three little white girls have been using scissors to cut out paper dolls during recess for the past three years.

Sad, sad story. But I wouldn't call this "political correctness". I'd call it a Police State.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

So let me see if I have this straight. Education is compulsory at the elementary and at least part of the secondary levels. Kids have to be there. And now we've also said that in addition to forcing them to be on the school grounds, their right to privacy is negligible?

Um, they are not being forced to be on school grounds. There is also home schooling and private schools.

That being said, I think these zero-tolerance policies are going too far, but I also think an atmosphere has been created that requires them. If someone brought a pair of scissors to school to open a CD, got mad at Porsche, and pulled them out, Porsche's mom would be quoted in the paper as saying "what's a 4th grade doing with an 8-inch pair of scissors in a school? how could they let that child bring those in?" You can't win if you're a school administrator.

[SunDancer]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Um, they are not being forced to be on school grounds. There is also home schooling and private schools.

That being said, I think these zero-tolerance policies are going too far, but I also think an atmosphere has been created that requires them. If someone brought a pair of scissors to school to open a CD, got mad at Porsche, and pulled them out, Porsche's mom would be quoted in the paper as saying "what's a 4th grade doing with an 8-inch pair of scissors in a school? how could they let that child bring those in?" You can't win if you're a school administrator.

Just curious, are you protected under the Constitution if your under 18. We protect our children under laws, but they don't have the rights of the Constitution. Am I correct?

[CamEdwards]

as bad as this story is, it isn't even close to the worst case of zero-tolerance nonsense I've seen lately. In fact, I'm surprised none of our Oklahoma City FOFC'ers haven't already chimed in with this.

http://www.enidnews.com/story.php?story_id=67841&c=32

Zero tolerance policies sometimes make zero sense.
Take the recent case of Chloe Smith, 14, an eighth-grader in Mustang kicked out of school after drugs were found in her locker.
Smith wasn’t in possession of marijuana or cocaine, but prescription hormones she takes for a chronic condition, polycystic ovarian disease.
During a routine sweep of the school, a drug dog “hit” on her locker. Administrators checked and found the prescription hormones in her purse.
Chloe has to take three different types of hormones to treat her disease. She must take the medication at different times during the day. She forgot to take the pills out of her purse after a family outing the evening before.
But the Mustang school district has a no-tolerance drug policy, so Chloe Smith was suspended from school.
The student violated school rules, and, as a result, should face some consequences. But to be kicked out of school seems unnecessarily harsh under the circumstances.
Under school regulations, required medications are supposed to be distributed through the office. Students are not allowed to be in possession of even over-the-counter medications such as aspirin.
Smith clearly violated these rules, but apparently as the result of an honest mistake, not willful disregard.
Perhaps she should have faced in-school suspension, or a session or two of after-school study. That would be appropriate to help her remember to remove her pills from her purse before going to school.
But kicking her out of school seems far too harsh.
The girl’s parents have filed an appeal, and have sought the assistance of the American Civil Liberties Union.
For its part the district has agreed to reduce Chloe’s suspension to 10 days if she agrees to eight hours of mandatory drug counseling and monthly urinalysis screening. Her family is rejecting this offer, not wanting their daughter to be labeled an illegal drug abuser, when she was found only to be in possession of required medications.
Zero tolerance for possession of illegal drugs is understandable and laudatory, but true zero tolerance also means zero leeway. That seems to be the situation the Mustang school district finds itself in.
The Mustang district, and all districts, need to make sure their zero tolerance policies don’t leave them with zero options when they are confronted by a case like Chloe Smith’s.

[JonInMiddleGA]

'Course, the sometimes very strict rules governing medications on school grounds came about after the popularity of selling prescription drugs among classmates. Granted, that doesn't appear to be the situation in this case, but I can see where consistency in enforcement is needed in order to keep the rules enforceable ... otherwise, you're liable to find yourself defending a different lawsuit and without a working drug policy on campus.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

as bad as this story is, it isn't even close to the worst case of zero-tolerance nonsense I've seen lately. In fact, I'm surprised none of our Oklahoma City FOFC'ers haven't already chimed in with this.

http://www.enidnews.com/story.php?story_id=67841&c=32

There have also been a number of children suspended/expelled for possessing cold or allergy medicine on a campus. Not to mention at least one case of a student being expelled for "drug trafficing" when they gave another student a cold tablet.

[GrantDawg]

In the cased that Cam and Glen mentioned, I can somewhat understand. These kids are clearly told not to bring these things to school, and espicially the kid giving another kid the cold pill knew what they were doing was wrong (either that, or they refused to pay attention to the numerous times their school went over the rules, and signed they read the rules when they didn't).

My problem is the level of punishment on such cases. Let the adminstrators have lee-way in how they handle these students. There was no reason to call the police in the first story, and a slap on the wrist would be affective in the last two. It is the removal of common sense in all these stories that makes me sick.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

These kids are clearly told not to bring these things to school, and espicially the kid giving another kid the cold pill knew what they were doing was wrong (either that, or they refused to pay attention to the numerous times their school went over the rules, and signed they read the rules when they didn't).

Sorry. I'm not buying that. I attended four different high schools, and fairly recently since I am only 21. Not a single one mentioned anything about their policy on cold medication and other drugs like that.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Danny Drickman

Sorry. I'm not buying that. I attended four different high schools, and fairly recently since I am only 21. Not a single one mentioned anything about their policy on cold medication and other drugs like that.

No, they say ANY drugs. They don't have to go specifically to a case by case when they say ANY drugs. I went to school 20 year ago, and they had pretty close to the same policies then. My daughter's school has it right in the handbook also. ANY means ANY.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

No, they say ANY drugs. They don't have to go specifically to a case by case when they say ANY drugs. I went to school 20 year ago, and they had pretty close to the same policies then. My daughter's school has it right in the handbook also. ANY means ANY.

My schools should have been fined then. They sold me or let me bring to school the drug Cafeine on a daily basis.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Axxon

Not really. I was confused when I first read the article and had to reread it for clarity. I thought it was kinda funny that someone else made the same mistake.

Of course, I DID reread it for clarity before I posted...

Give yourself a pair of pats on the back. Oh wait you already did.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Danny Drickman

My schools should have been fined then. They sold me or let me bring to school the drug Cafeine on a daily basis.

I'm sure the rule is put more elequently than my simple post. It probably had to do with prescription and OTC drugs.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I'm sure the rule is put more elequently than my simple post. It probably had to do with prescription and OTC drugs.

I understand what you're saying, and I am sure the schools had written rules regarding such things. But, these rules were not exactly made clearly known. I never brought anything like advil or pepto bismol to school, but that was because I had parents who taught me things like this. Unfortunately, not all kids have parents like that.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

No, they say ANY drugs. They don't have to go specifically to a case by case when they say ANY drugs. I went to school 20 year ago, and they had pretty close to the same policies then. My daughter's school has it right in the handbook also. ANY means ANY.

I went to school twenty years ago, and pretty much carried prescription drugs on my person when ever I had them prescribed. I'm more than certain I carried Over the Counter cold releif tablets or even cough medicine with me when needed. I don't beleive I would have hesitated in the least in sharing those OTC products if asked by a friend, or even offering them myself. So there certainly seemed to be a common sense distinction back then with regard to my school district.

Now I do agree that if the policy is "no" drugs, then they can effectively ban these "innocent" type medications as well. Providing that students should be able to get waivers for their prescription drugs, and maybe even cold meds. I do also agree that the real ridiculousness of these accounts is the zero tolerance of the punishment.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I went to school twenty years ago, and pretty much carried prescription drugs on my person when ever I had them prescribed. I'm more than certain I carried Over the Counter cold releif tablets or even cough medicine with me when needed. I don't beleive I would have hesitated in the least in sharing those OTC products if asked by a friend, or even offering them myself. So there certainly seemed to be a common sense distinction back then with regard to my school district.

Now I do agree that if the policy is "no" drugs, then they can effectively ban these "innocent" type medications as well. Providing that students should be able to get waivers for their prescription drugs, and maybe even cold meds. I do also agree that the real ridiculousness of these accounts is the zero tolerance of the punishment.

Understand that 20 years ago not all schools had such policies. This is a more recent phenominom (which my school must have been ahead of the curve). My school's policy was you couldn't bring them unless by prescription, and then they must be taken directly to the school nurse/clinic. That is the way it is at my daughter's school now.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Danny Drickman

I understand what you're saying, and I am sure the schools had written rules regarding such things. But, these rules were not exactly made clearly known. I never brought anything like advil or pepto bismol to school, but that was because I had parents who taught me things like this. Unfortunately, not all kids have parents like that.

Really? They didn't go over the rule book at the beginging of the quarter? You never had to sign a statement saying you understand the rules? You didn't have to get your parents to sign a sheet saying they undertand the rules? Shoot, my daughter is in elementary school and they do that, and they did it in my high-school, again, 20 years ago.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Really? They didn't go over the rule book at the beginging of the quarter? You never had to sign a statement saying you understand the rules? You didn't have to get your parents to sign a sheet saying they undertand the rules? Shoot, my daughter is in elementary school and they do that, and they did it in my high-school, again, 20 years ago.

They didn't go over any rule book before signing up. I never signed any statement. I don't remember if my parents signed anything, but they probably did. I did have a talk about the dress code because I wore a back to the future shirt that said "what are you looking at butthead" printed on the back on the first day in one of the schools.

Keep in mind, that in my case, I didn't go to any orientation or do anything before the semesters started. My mom went and signed me up for the school and when the semester started, I went. Also, I missed much of high school due to constant moving and going back and forth between parents, so I am sure there were assemblies that talked about this. Still, I am sure there are plenty of other exceptions like my case.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Danny Drickman

They didn't go over any rule book before signing up. I never signed any statement. I don't remember if my parents signed anything, but they probably did. I did have a talk about the dress code because I wore a back to the future shirt that said "what are you looking at butthead" printed on the back on the first day in one of the schools.

Keep in mind, that in my case, I didn't go to any orientation or do anything before the semesters started. My mom went and signed me up for the school and when the semester started, I went. Also, I missed much of high school due to constant moving and going back and forth between parents, so I am sure there were assemblies that talked about this. Still, I am sure there are plenty of other exceptions like my case.

Then it sounds more like your specific situation. Or you saying every student has had that exact same experience? In this day of zero-tolerance and fear of lawsuits, I would say more schools than not go over their drug and weapon policies at the begining of the year. And of course, ignorance is never a defense anyway.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Then it sounds more like your specific situation. Or you saying every student has had that exact same experience?

Did you read that last sentence or just skip over it? I clearly stated my case was an exception.

Also, this was your original quote that I disagreed with.

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

These kids are clearly told not to bring these things to school, and espicially the kid giving another kid the cold pill knew what they were doing was wrong (either that, or they refused to pay attention to the numerous times their school went over the rules, and signed they read the rules when they didn't).

Sounds like you were the one saying that all students had the same experiences. I simply showed that there are cases where your statement is incorrect, mine being one of them.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Really? They didn't go over the rule book at the beginging of the quarter? You never had to sign a statement saying you understand the rules? You didn't have to get your parents to sign a sheet saying they undertand the rules? Shoot, my daughter is in elementary school and they do that, and they did it in my high-school, again, 20 years ago.

I never did either. Weird.

[Neon_Chaos]

i think it's in the perogative of the school to confiscate the scissors, but to actually have cops arrest and handcuff the ten year old girl is ridiculous and shows the incompetence of the school staff.

[cougarfreak]

I would bet the ANY drugs policy simply comes from insurance concerns. The first time a kid kicks the bucket because he takes an OTC cold pill at school that he happened to be allergic to, who do you think is going to be sued if schools allowed kids to bring medicines to school? The schools are protecting themselves from a law suit waiting to happen.

[Mac Howard]

I remember a comment from somewhere back that went something like "While the law is necessary an ass the application doesn't have to be asinine"

Maybe that's just naive

[mightyshoe]

This has been one of my pet peeves for a long time. It doesn't surprise me at all that this happened though. The teacher and principal want to be a part of something. Keeping schools safe, the War on Terror or whatever. This blinds them to the spirit of the law. This is by no means isolated. I've heard of a high school studend expelled because he forgot to take his civil war re-enactment costume home. He did have a musket, but not one that worked (It was a costume) and the teacher, wanting to be a part of something had him expelled.
This is a perfect example of chicken*#$!#.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by mightyshoe

This has been one of my pet peeves for a long time. It doesn't surprise me at all that this happened though. The teacher and principal want to be a part of something. Keeping schools safe, the War on Terror or whatever. This blinds them to the spirit of the law. This is by no means isolated. I've heard of a high school studend expelled because he forgot to take his civil war re-enactment costume home. He did have a musket, but not one that worked (It was a costume) and the teacher, wanting to be a part of something had him expelled.
This is a perfect example of chicken*#$!#.

I heard something on the news today about to local kids getting expelled for having toy guns at school. Again, they knew they shouldn't so should get punished, but expelled?

[mightyshoe]

But this was a case where the student brought it to the teachers attention, plust it was in the students car. at some point the teacher should look at the spirit of the law before he/she goes about hurting someone.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by mightyshoe

But this was a case where the student brought it to the teachers attention, plust it was in the students car. at some point the teacher should look at the spirit of the law before he/she goes about hurting someone.

A common sense zero tolerance policy is an oxymoron. The two can apparently not be mixed.