# Eagle Scout and future West Pointer suspended for a pocket knife



## laurac260 (Oct 14, 2009)

This story really bothers me.  I wish I was as focused, disciplined and dedicated to school and my future endeavors at 17 as this kid is.  I cannot believe he was suspended from school for having a pocket knife in his survival kit in his car.   The school district refuses to back down and he is missing something like 30 days of his senior year.  

I actually called the superintendent today to tell him how I felt about it.  If you want to do the same, PM me and I will provide you with his name and phone as I don't think I can post it here (or you can look it up yourself).  It is the Lansingburgh, NY school system.


----------



## Luanne (Oct 14, 2009)

And what about the first grader who was facing a possible 45 days in a juvenile detention center for bringing his "spork", which is his favorite camping utensil, to school?


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 14, 2009)

Luanne said:


> And what about the first grader who was facing a possible 45 days in a juvenile detention center for bringing his "spork", which is his favorite camping utensil, to school?



just as ridiculous.  Probably more so.  The difference is, they realized the stupidity in their ways, and the 6 year old got to go back to school.  This kid will not.


----------



## Luanne (Oct 14, 2009)

laurac260 said:


> just as ridiculous.  Probably more so.  The difference is, they realized the stupidity in their ways, and the 6 year old got to go back to school.  This kid will not.



But, he was still suspended for a few days until the decision was made.  And it did cause the "no tolerance" policy to be re-looked at.  However, they only changed it for kindergarten and first grade.

You said the boy was suspended, but won't be going back to school?????  Did you mean expelled?


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 14, 2009)

Luanne said:


> But, he was still suspended for a few days until the decision was made.  And it did cause the "no tolerance" policy to be re-looked at.  However, they only changed it for kindergarten and first grade.
> 
> You said the boy was suspended, but won't be going back to school?????  Did you mean expelled?



What I am saying is, with the 6 year old, they reversed their decision.  With the 17 year old, they will not reverse their decision.  The 6 year old story was ridiculous.  I won't be calling his school system because from what I understand he is allowed back in school now.  I did call the superintendent of the 17 year old though, because they are sticking by their decision to keep him suspended.  Sorry if that was confusing.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 14, 2009)

*Be Prepared.  Always Carry Your Scout Knife.*

Shux, aren't Eagle Scouts _required_ to carry Scout knives at all times ? 





-- hotkinked --





-- hotlinked --​
_Be prepared ! _

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 14, 2009)

I teach at a high school and I see this from an enforcement angle.  I agree that this is unfortunate, but how do you decide who gets to have a knife in their car and who doesn't?  Do you want all students to be allowed to have a pocketknife in their car? Do you give the honors student a slap on the wrist, and give a D student the 20 day suspension?  BTW - he was suspended for 20 days, not expelled.  

In my Dist., with these kind of offenses, there is a predetermined consequence that is supposed to be applied to the situation. If all students who have weapons on campus get 20 days, then I'd say it was perfectly fair.  If the consequences are not applied to everyone, or due process for that Dist. was not followed,  then probably not.  I would bet my next paycheck that this young man knew 1) that his car could be searched on campus, and 2) that he was not allowed to have a pocketknife on campus...

YMMV


----------



## beejaybeeohio (Oct 14, 2009)

*Curious about Car*

How was the knife discovered in the student's vehicle?  Is it school policy to conduct searches of vehicles parked on school property? Does there need to be probable cause? Did someone narc on this kid? Was it a random search?  This could be a case for the ACLU!


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Oct 14, 2009)

beejaybeeohio said:


> How was the knife discovered in the student's vehicle?  Is it school policy to conduct searches of vehicles parked on school property? Does there need to be probable cause? Did someone narc on this kid? Was it a random search?  This could be a case for the ACLU!



Someone did report him.  I think it's all ridiculous, and what about a tire iron?  Should we get upset when someone has that weapon in their car?  People have been killed with tire irons.  

What about a screwdriver?  What if you have a job after school and have to carry a utility knife?  

This is nuts!  If you searched every car in a school parking lot, what would you find that could hurt someone?  

Pretty soon, schools will ban pencils!


----------



## Passepartout (Oct 14, 2009)

With apologies to Randy Cassingham who has been crusading about 'ZT' for years. Here's a couple from this weeks' "This Is True" free email newsletter. Zero Tolerance, and the general lack of tolerance in our society is somethging we all need to defend against. I applaud the poster for calling the school superintendant about this issue!


ZERO TOLERANCE, CAREGIVER DIVISION: The first Sally Harpold knew there
   was a problem was when sheriff's deputies showed up at her home in
   Clinton, Ind., with a warrant for her arrest. But the evidence was
   clear: four months before, her husband had gotten a cold, and she went
   to the drugstore and got him some over-the-counter cold medicine. A few
   days later her daughter caught the cold, so Harpold stopped at another
   drugstore and got her some medicine too. Once the purchase paperwork
   was matched up, authorities realized she had committed the crime of
   buying 3.6 grams of pseudoephedrine, an ingredient of crystal meth, but
   also a common decongestant for runny noses. "The law does not make this
   distinction," says Vermillion County Prosecutor Nina Alexander. "I'm
   simply enforcing the law as it was written." State law limits purchases
   to 3.0 grams in any 7-day period. Harpold was taken away in handcuffs,
   and her local newspaper ran her mug shot on the front page with the
   headline, "17 Arrested in Drug Sweep". She faces up to 60 days in jail
   and a $500 fine. "It's unfortunate," said Vigo County Sheriff Jon
   Marvel, whose deputies made the arrest. "But for the good of everyone,
   the law was put into effect." (Terre Haute Tribune-Star) ...Not
   "everyone" agrees, sheriff.

ZERO TOLERANCE, BABYSITTER DIVISION: Lisa Snyder lives near a school bus
   stop in Middleville, Mich. A couple of neighbors need to head for work
   before the bus arrives, so Snyder said she would be happy to keep an
   eye on their kids until the bus arrives. But when the Michigan
   Department of Human Services heard about it, they ordered her to stop:
   watching someone else's kids makes her home an "unlicensed daycare
   facility" in the state's eyes. To comply with its rules, she must apply
   for a license to watch the kids -- even though she doesn't charge
   anything. "It's crazy," Snyder said. "I'm just helping out a couple of
   friends." She asked State Rep. Brian Calley for help, but when he
   called DHS they told him to bug off. He has promised legislation to
   deal with the problem. (Kalamazoo Gazette) ...Hopefully he'll make it
   retroactive to help the hundreds of 16-year-olds who are already doing
   hard time.

Jim Ricks


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 14, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> Someone did report him.  I think it's all ridiculous, and what about a tire iron?  Should we get upset when someone has that weapon in their car?  People have been killed with tire irons.
> 
> What about a screwdriver?  What if you have a job after school and have to carry a utility knife?
> 
> ...



Here's the story as I understand it.  A "friend" (I use this term loosely) told someone at the school that Matthew had a knife on his person. Matthew was called to the office, there was a law enforcement officer (police, sherrif), there, and they asked him if he had a weapon.  He said no, and agreed to a search of his person.  They asked if he had a knife in his car, and he explained that he did.  He took them out to his car, showed them the knife (which was in the survival kit he ALWAYS carries with him), and that is why he was suspended.  

I asked the woman who took my call if the super had issues with the fact that the boy was interested in being in the military, and if that was why they were taking such a hardline stance on him.  They said they could not comment on the situation, but would pass along the message.


----------



## Rose Pink (Oct 14, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> Pretty soon, schools will ban pencils!


 
True story:  long ago I substituted in a 5th grade classroom. A previous sub refused to come back. The kids were wild.  They were making arrows by placing straight pins into the eraser end of pencils.  Then they would fire the arrows with rubber bands.  

Anything can be turned into a weapon.  For the creative mind, anything can become a weapon.  Wasn't there a television show with that premise?  McGiver or something.  You could use a belt or even a shirt to tie someone up or strangle them.  Should we eliminate clothes?  Wait, looking at many teens (and adults) I think they already have.  At least you know they aren't hiding anything in their navels.


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 14, 2009)

Rose Pink said:


> True story:  long ago I substituted in a 5th grade classroom. A previous sub refused to come back. The kids were wild.  They were making arrows by placing straight pins into the eraser end of pencils.  Then they would fire the arrows with rubber bands.
> 
> Anything can be turned into a weapon.  For the creative mind, anything can become a weapon.  Wasn't there a television show with that premise?  McGiver or something.  You could use a belt or even a shirt to tie someone up or strangle them.  Should we eliminate clothes?  Wait, looking at many teens (and adults) I think they already have.  At least you know they aren't hiding anything in their navels.



ahh, the good ole' days when kids would just INVENT their own fun!!!  My dad said that when he was a kid they used to make sling shots out of old bicycle tires and  just the right kind of tree branch.  And yes, I do remember making those rubberband arrows.  Good times!


----------



## UWSurfer (Oct 14, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> I teach at a high school and I see this from an enforcement angle.  I agree that this is unfortunate, but how do you decide who gets to have a knife in their car and who doesn't?  Do you want all students to be allowed to have a pocketknife in their car? Do you give the honors student a slap on the wrist, and give a D student the 20 day suspension?  BTW - he was suspended for 20 days, not expelled.
> 
> In my Dist., with these kind of offenses, there is a predetermined consequence that is supposed to be applied to the situation. If all students who have weapons on campus get 20 days, then I'd say it was perfectly fair.  If the consequences are not applied to everyone, or due process for that Dist. was not followed,  then probably not.  I would bet my next paycheck that this young man knew 1) that his car could be searched on campus, and 2) that he was not allowed to have a pocketknife on campus...
> 
> YMMV



Denise I completely understand the argument you present and don't for one minute think you aren't faced with a challenging environment to work in.  You need clear guidelines and rules to make the place safe and be consistent with those you teach and work with.  What follows is not directed at you.

There's a problem with ZT and the rules in general when it doesn't permit someone to interpret and consider the circumstances.    I think those of us in the general public know that there isn't a crime here and the punishment is wrong.   We can spin it one way (rules or rules) or another (doesn't anybody think in that district), but general common sense is lacking here.   A pocket knife as part of an emergency survival kit, all locked up in a car of a 17 y/o is not a student possessing a weapon.    The car itself could be considered a weapon if utilized incorrectly but we acknowledge the intended use of the car is something different than to be a dangerous weapon.  So too is the knife in this scenario, but for whatever reason which is difficult to comprehend, the district does not wish to acknowledge intent and circumstances here.  

The purpose of an education is to provide an enlightened population who can deduce and reason in life and the world, among other things.   It's one of the things which bothers me the most about educational institutions is the inability to do that itself.


----------



## Rose Pink (Oct 14, 2009)

UWSurfer said:


> There's a problem with ZT and the rules in general when it doesn't permit someone to interpret and consider the circumstances. I think those of us in the general public know that there isn't a crime here and the punishment is wrong. We can spin it one way (rules or rules) or another (doesn't anybody think in that district), but general common sense is lacking here. A pocket knife as part of an emergency survival kit, all locked up in a car of a 17 y/o is not a student possessing a weapon. The car itself could be considered a weapon if utilized incorrectly but we acknowledge the intended use of the car is something different than to be a dangerous weapon. So too is the knife in this scenario, but for whatever reason which is difficult to comprehend, the district does not wish to acknowledge intent and circumstances here.
> 
> *The purpose of an education is to provide an enlightened population who can deduce and reason in life and the world, among other things. It's one of the things which bothers me the most about educational institutions is the inability to do that itself*.


 
 Well said!  A knife is a tool just as is a screwdriver or a car or a pencil or a dish rag.  Any of those things can be _used_ as a weapon but that doesn't mean they were meant to be weapons.  A knife is not necessarily a weapon.  I use knives every day.  I use them to butter my toast, cut my meat, slice my tomatoes, etc.


----------



## nightnurse613 (Oct 15, 2009)

These stories make me sick!  They are NOT as UNCOMMON as some people believe.  We recently had a case here in Arizona where a couple took some nude photos of their young children. A Wal-Mart employee alerted police who alerted  Child Protective Services and the children were removed from the home. Later the photos were seen by a judge who said they were (at least in HIS mind) NOT erotic or pornographic. Meanwhile you can guess what the parents and the children went through - it took a month before the children were allowed to return home. It's too easy to hide behind the law and not use common sense. The problem is if you vary in your treatment, that will get you in a discrimination lawsuit.  Of course, when I fly I still have to remove my sandals.   By the way, Alan, my husband says if that's your old Boy Scout knife he wants your Totin Chip   (whatever that is)!


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 15, 2009)

nightnurse613 said:


> Later the photos were seen by a judge who said they were [not] (at least in HIS mind) erotic or pornographic.



I think the word "not" is missing, right?


----------



## Icarus (Oct 15, 2009)

Why do we insisting on making the Eagle Scout and future military man part of this story?

What if it was some derelict kid that had the knife in his car survival kit? Would that have been ok, because he wasn't an Eagle Scout or future military man? What if the knife wasn't part of a survival kit?

I guess it wouldn't have been such a good story for the media to pick up if he wasn't an Eagle Scout and future military man.

-David


----------



## wackymother (Oct 15, 2009)

Icarus said:


> Why do we insisting on making the Eagle Scout and future military man part of this story?
> 
> What if it was some derelict kid that had the knife in his car survival kit? Would that have been ok, because he wasn't an Eagle Scout or future military man? What if the knife wasn't part of a survival kit?
> 
> ...



The West Point information is relevant because the student's suspension from school may result in his acceptance to West Point being revoked.


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 15, 2009)

Icarus said:


> Why do we insisting on making the Eagle Scout and future military man part of this story?
> 
> What if it was some derelict kid that had the knife in his car survival kit? Would that have been ok, because he wasn't an Eagle Scout or future military man? What if the knife wasn't part of a survival kit?
> 
> ...



I think both are very relevant.  The fact that he is an Eagle scout shows intent and purpose.  Suppose a guy gets picked up because his car happens to match a make and model of a car that was seen driving away after a stabbing.  They search the guys car and find knives.  Well, he must be the one, right?  Except, the guy is a chef, and the knives are tools of his trade.  Me. I am not a chef, not a hunter, fisherman nor outdoorsman, so there is no need for me to have knives in my car or on my person.  The Eagle scout had them in his survival kit.  That is the purpose of the knife.

The future West Pointer is also relevant.  Both as the above poster mentioned, but also in case the school system has shown any type of bias toward the military (as some school systems have), by not letting recruiters on campus.  This _could potentially_ show that the superintendent had it out for the kid because he wanted to be in the military.   Not saying this is the case, but it certainly makes his WP future a relevant item.


----------



## akp (Oct 15, 2009)

*A petition in support of Matthew Whalen, for what it is worth.*

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/HelpMatthewWhalen/


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 15, 2009)

I think it's possible to see both sides of this issue, if you think abstractly about the overall justice system we use in this country.  Punishments are always relative to the crime, aren't they?  That makes this kid's status as an Eagle Scout and WP nominee (?) relevant because it explains his valid reasons for having a knife/survival kit in his car.

Zero tolerance as it's practiced in schools is a bag fat pain in the rear, no doubt, but as Denise said, it's necessary during these increasingly-violent times.  Educators simply cannot be expected to do their jobs well if they're not afforded some kind of protection from the violence.  If they're asked to evaluate every single situation as it happens, then they're taking time away from educating students.  The extreme situations hit the newswires and make us wonder what this world is coming to (!) but statistics show that there are countless situations every single day.  Our students cannot be asked to suffer any loss of teachable time while our educators play judge, jury, and executioner.  Zero tolerance allows for immediate, unqualified, unbiased action.  It also allows for further review, although the news doesn't always report when a student is given the benefit of the doubt after the fact.

Denise also mentioned that this kid probably knew the rules.  I'd say that if he didn't, that means he didn't read the rule book, which is against the rules in itself!  What does that say for his Eagle Scout training and to the WP acceptance committee, that he was willing to break the rules?


----------



## Icarus (Oct 15, 2009)

[Political/inflammatory comments deleted - DeniseM Moderator]


----------



## geekette (Oct 15, 2009)

Zero Tolerance says it doesn't matter why he had it, and his future plans are irrelevant.

The lesson is, don't have a knife on your person or in your car.

And if you do have one, don't tell anyone!

It becomes up to West Point as to whether or not this incident is a deal-breaker and that's a side issue.  Presumably the kid will be allowed to graduate.

Sorry, but with ZT, sometimes people get caught up in crap all blown out of proportion. So it goes with this kid.

If my kid that was becoming (insert impressive occupation here) got popped for having, I dunno, Something Innoculous but against the rules, I would be mad as hell if my kid got the full rap but this kid didn't.  ZT is ZT.  Character, intent, liklihood of being a productive citizen, none of it matters.  You cross the line, you pay the price.


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 15, 2009)

[Response to imflammatory comments deleted-DeniseM Moderator]


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Oct 15, 2009)

David, a tire iron is a weapon, and every car has one, but I think they call it a lug wrench.  It can be a weapon.  The car is a weapon!  My dad told me that when I was learning to drive, and he was right.  

Having a knife in a CAR is different from carrying it around on your person.  There are lots of things in a car that are very dangerous to carry around with your school books, but this kid WASN'T carrying around the knife.  

What is wrong with being prepared for an emergency?  What about driving your dad's car, who happens to be a handyman or has a business installing carpet, and just happens to have a utility knife in the car?  What are you supposed to do in that case?

There has to be exceptions!

I wanted to add that a discipline young man could do better in home study than sitting in a classroom during those days he is suspended.  I think he will be just fine with his studies, since most of classroom time is spent disciplining kids who are out of control, taking attendance, and other things that take away from classroom time.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 15, 2009)

This thread is one post away from being closed... I know it's the nature of the topic, but let's please try not to go there...

Thanks!
DeniseM


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 15, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> This thread is one post away from being closed... I know it's the nature of the topic, but let's please try not to go there...
> 
> Thanks!
> DeniseM



Denise, there is NO REASON why a topic such as this should result in people behaving in an inflammatory way.  That certainly was not the intent of the original post.  No worries though, I added David/aka Icarus to my ignore list, as you have previously suggested to others.


----------



## geekette (Oct 15, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> David, a tire iron is a weapon, and every car has one, but I think they call it a lug wrench.  It can be a weapon.  The car is a weapon!  My dad told me that when I was learning to drive, and he was right.
> 
> Having a knife in a CAR is different from carrying it around on your person.  There are lots of things in a car that are very dangerous to carry around with your school books, but this kid WASN'T carrying around the knife.
> 
> ...



There are no exceptions with ZT.  There is Zero Tolerance, Zero listening to the whys and wherefores, Zero concern for your grades or your parents or how much your grandpa might "donate" to make this go away.

If you take papa's vehicle to school and it has prohibited items, well, you just may get punished.  There are no exceptions.  ZERO tolerance.

In the car vs on the person seems to not matter in this case, so I would expect that the rules cover The Campus. So, if he's going to have a knife in his survival kit, he should probably not park on campus.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Oct 15, 2009)

Perhaps there should be zero tolerance for teachers and administrators who fail their students.  Giving them mandatory sentences for lack of performance would do one of two very helpful things.  1) It would increase performance.  2) It would demonstrate how ludicrous their zero tolerance policy is.  What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.

At this point, I hope that all of the teachers and administrators in that school district get pummelled by an onslaught of letters and phone calls express the stupidity of their policy and their judgement in applying a penalty.  It is my understanding that the student initially only received 5 days suspension. Then, it was increased to 20.

I wouldn't worry about the student.  He will almost assuredly get into West Point now.


----------



## bluehende (Oct 15, 2009)

*email*

Would it be possible to post the Email to the school or administation.  I would like to comment to them.  I don't want to call as I think inundating (sp) the school with calls will disrupt the learning process there.  However a deluge of emails even if not read will get the point across.

Wayne


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 15, 2009)

BocaBum99 said:


> Perhaps there should be zero tolerance for teachers and administrators who fail their students.



This is not a good analogy, because teachers do not determine district rules, and administrators do not fail students.  In fact, teachers do not fail students either - only the student can do that.  The teacher may record the grade, but the student earns the grade.

When you have a no tolerance rule, and start making exceptions, it gets really tricky.  For instance:

Who is going to be allowed to have a pocketknife in their car?
What about kids in gangs?
What about kids with a bad temper?
What about kids who feel threatened at school?
What about "cutters?"
How do you know which kids can be trusted with pocketknives and which can't?

It gets complicated...


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Oct 15, 2009)

Denise, BocaBum is saying that teacher fail students by not giving them a good education, not that the students are failing.  But I read it the same way the first time, too.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 15, 2009)

I think Zero Tolerance is necessary in a school setting, even when it results in what appears to be overkill in either judgment or punishment.  But I think that folks who buy into the sensationalized news reporting of the initial action in extreme cases sometimes forget, or don't know in the first place, that every Student Handbook or Code of Conduct or whatever it might be called also allows for the further review of any and every situation which calls for disciplinary action.

Zero Tolerance simply allows for the safest school zone possible in that it gives students, teachers and administrators the ability to immediately remove a threat from the site.  It's unfortunate that sometimes the implementation of the unambiguous rules will result in a good student who made a stupid mistake being penalized for a time beyond what may be necessary, sure.  But as often as we are "treated" to the sensationalized stories, it happens that common sense prevails in the follow-up review.  We just don't hear about that because it's not enough of an attention-grabber for the news to waste time on it.

I think it's kind of funny how some folks will remember that in the Good Old Days we made all kinds of trouble that would break umpteen rules if done today, and say that the same should be allowed today because we turned out okay.  What about the stuff that we're leaving out that Zero Tolerance has eliminated, like school bullies and weapons in the hands of students who intend harm and educators who had no supporting back-up when they tried to instill discipline in their classrooms, etc?

I think that just like the 6YO who got caught up in the ZT trap but was then released, this high-schooler will also have his day when his rule-breaking will be reviewed and his punishment lessened.  But I also think that it doesn't necessarily take sensationalized news stories for that to happen - every day in most every school some kid is given a second chance.  Zero Tolerance policies do not preclude a review after the incident, when the most important object is to reduce the threat.


----------



## teepeeca (Oct 15, 2009)

If there is zero-tollerance for students, does it also apply to teachers and school staff?  That is, no knives on school grounds.  If so, then probably ALL the teachers and staff should be suspended, or fired.  The reason, I would tend to think that "all of them" have actually used a knife at school (while eating a meal---BUT, under ZT, the reason doesn't matter) !!!

What about the kitchen staff?  Don't they actually use a knife almost every day---AND---that they "CUT THINGS" with them.

Everything is NOT just "black and white"---someone should have some common sense.

Tony


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 15, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> Denise, BocaBum is saying that teacher fail students by not giving them a good education, not that the students are failing.  But I read it the same way the first time, too.



Unfortunately, that happens sometimes, and as a teacher - I HATE IT!  Some people have no business being teachers!  However, in my 30 years of experience (I was 5 when I started teaching  ) the vast majority of students who get an "F," earn it fair and square.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 15, 2009)

teepeeca said:


> If there is zero-tollerance for students, does it also apply to teachers and school staff?



It does not - school rules apply to minor children, not to adults.  Of course there are rules for teachers, but they are separate rules and they do not include what we can or cannot have in our cars.

Let me give you an example:  If I stop and buy groceries on my way to work, and have a bottle of wine in my trunk on campus, that is perfectly OK.  If a student has a bottle of alcohol in their car on campus - not OK.  How would anyone ever know?  On a regular basis (every other month) the drug dogs come and randomly "sniff," lockers, backpacks, cars, etc.  No probable cause is required - it's completely random and involuntary.  These dogs can also find weapons like guns and knives.

Some rules apply to everyone - students cannot smoke on campus and neither can staff.

However, one time I ordered school supplies and them were shipped in a recycled box that had once contained ammunition.  That made them very nervous in the office, and they asked me to come up and open the box in the office.  We had a good laugh over it.


----------



## Art4th (Oct 15, 2009)

laurac260 said:


> It is the Lansingburgh, NY school system.



This is so ridiculous it's embarrassing. This school district is about 15 miles from my house. A friend of mine retired from there as few years ago.


----------



## rapmarks (Oct 15, 2009)

several years ago, the year before Columbine, we had an expulsion of three students at my school because of a gun in school.  One boy went to t he press and claimed he only took it out of the school , he was a hero.  the press glorified him.  the administration said that it was not true, but couldn't go into details with the press or the staff.  Would you believe a month later, another student walked into the office with a reporter and turned in a gun he said he had had in his locker, trying to get the same press coverage, and later in the year another student had a gun in his book bag (but no press coverage this time). 
My point is that the administration is not going to tell you anything and i doubt if any non taxpayers in t he district would have much influence.
Of the three boys expelled, one boy's parents petitoned  and did get the expulsion cut to one semester, the "press" boy got off with just a suspension, the other boy's parents did nothing.  When the boy came back a year later to school, he was in my class.  He had a lot of problems  of a social nature, but he did what he needed to do in class and caused no problems.  He was suspended again late in t he year when he walked by a girl in study hall and shoved her face into the desk, breaking her nose.  In the following years, I had two of his younger brothers.  These boys too, would suddenly become hostile for no reason and belligerant, after months of doing fine.


----------



## pianodinosaur (Oct 15, 2009)

When I was in Strategic Air Command we were all subject to random urine tests for drugs. This even applied to the wing commander.  If you tested positive, you were in deep trouble.  Furthermore, SAC had a Personel Reliability Program.  This meant that if an active duty member of SAC was on any kind of prescription medication that could impair his or her judgment, it had to be reported by the prescribing physician. The Inspector General's Office would make periodic inspections of the wing.  The Personel Reliability Program was considered so important that if there was one discrepancy, the entire wing would flunk.  That would be the end of the hospital commander's career, the wing commander's career, and the base commander's career.  This is because we had weapons with live ammo that included live nukes.  I think this truly was a situation that required zero tolerance.  There were plenty of 18 year olds on the base who were subject to these rules.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Oct 15, 2009)

Back in 1968, my friend brought her dad's gun to school and kept it in her purse for several weeks, showing it to everyone like it was a badge of honor.  

She was never caught, and I think I should have probably said something, at least to her dad, but I was only 13 and didn't think it through.  I just knew she would never hurt anyone, she just thought she was being cool.  I don't even know if she had ammunition.  

I am still friends with her today, and she will admit it was a bonehead thing to do.


----------



## Icarus (Oct 15, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> This thread is one post away from being closed... I know it's the nature of the topic, but let's please try not to go there...
> 
> Thanks!
> DeniseM



My response to post #20 was political, but post #20 and others in this thread are not?

Half of the nature of my post was about the ZT stuff. The other part, which I guess you considered to be political, but I have no idea, because the entire post was deleted, was about the comment in post #20 about public schools being considered anti-military if they don't invite military recruiters on their campus. I didn't create that premise. Somebody else did in this thread, but I responded to it. But mostly the entire post was about how this entire thing is media inflamed nonsense.

So is this the message: if you are tug-politically correct, then it's ok to post political stuff, but if you aren't and you piss people off because your opinion is different than their opinion or the mainstream tug-PC opinion, it's not ok?

I'd really like to know.

-David


----------



## Icarus (Oct 15, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> David, a tire iron is a weapon, and every car has one, but I think they call it a lug wrench.  It can be a weapon.  The car is a weapon!  My dad told me that when I was learning to drive, and he was right.
> 
> Having a knife in a CAR is different from carrying it around on your person.  There are lots of things in a car that are very dangerous to carry around with your school books, but this kid WASN'T carrying around the knife.
> 
> ...



I wasn't arguing against any of that.

-David


----------



## PigsDad (Oct 15, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> Zero Tolerance simply allows for the safest school zone possible in that it gives students, teachers and administrators the ability to immediately remove a threat from the site.


I would have to disagree with that statement.  ZT simply makes it easier for the school officials, that's all.  Without ZT, the school administrators would actually have to use their judgement and take into consideration the circumstances before making a decision.  In other words, they would have to use their brain.

With ZT, no brain power is needed.  _Of course _school officials will defend ZT policies -- it makes their job easier (a monkey could be trained to do the same thing).  I don't see anything about a ZT policy that would make for a "safer" environment.

Can you imagine what the US justice system would be like if it was based on ZT policies?  Why do you think that we have "judges"?

Kurt


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 15, 2009)

David - I will send you a private message.

DeniseM


----------



## Talent312 (Oct 15, 2009)

PigsDad said:


> Can you imagine what the US justice system would be like if it was based on ZT policies? Why do you think that we have "judges?"



But even judges are often hamstrung with mandatory minimum sentences, sentencing guidelines, and directed probationary conditions, which sometimes are ill-suited or absurd. What about terminally-ill guy facing a 3-yr. mandatory minimum for trafficking in drugs, based on unlawful possession of 18 percocets? Yep. Its the law.

The bare-naked truth is that School Boards and the public simply don't trust school administrators (or judges) to exercise sound discretion in a common-sense manner. Unfortunately, many of those, when faced with such decision-making, have helped to foster the impression that they cannot be trusted to do so.

BTW, my father was an Assistant Principal, and can I say that common sense was his strong suit?  Ummmmm...


----------



## pianodinosaur (Oct 15, 2009)

We had a situation in our community where one teenage girl gave another teenage girl some tyelenol for her menstrual cramps. This violated some ZT drug policy and both girls were in trouble.


----------



## Talent312 (Oct 15, 2009)

pianodinosaur said:


> We had a situation in our community where one teenage girl gave another teenage girl some tyelenol for her menstrual cramps. This violated some ZT drug policy and both girls were in trouble.



In a case that reached a Florida appeals-court, a 16-year old student was charged+sentenced as an adult for "attempted sale of a counterfeit substance" when he showed another student some aspirin and asked if he wanted some crack. The kid said he was joking, but of course, the powers-that-be did not see it that way. The Appeals Court said, "There was no showing that this was anything other than an ill-advised joke, and directed a not-guilty verdict.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 15, 2009)

PigsDad said:


> I would have to disagree with that statement.  ZT simply makes it easier for the school officials, that's all.  Without ZT, the school administrators would actually have to use their judgement and take into consideration the circumstances before making a decision.  In other words, they would have to use their brain.
> 
> With ZT, no brain power is needed.  _Of course _school officials will defend ZT policies -- it makes their job easier (a monkey could be trained to do the same thing).  I don't see anything about a ZT policy that would make for a "safer" environment.
> 
> ...



Well, judges are to school superintendents/boards as police are to principals/teachers, is the way I see it.  Give the personnel in the buildings the tools to do what they need to do to keep the environment as safe as possible, and let the administrators deal with the whys and hows and punishments.  Zero Tolerance is that tool. 

Monkeys?  Really?  School administrators still have to use their brains when a disciplinary code is enforced and must be defended, whether or not it's a minor or major infraction or if it's subject to a zero-tolerance rule.  ZT policy simply makes it easier for the school personnel to act immediately to remove what is perceived to be a threat at the time of the threat.  I suppose you can decry that "innocent until proven guilty" is suspended with ZT policy, but it's sort of like how yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre is approached.  All the free speech in the world won't save you from being charged at the moment with being a public menace if you do so, just as anything threatening in our schools won't be tolerated at the moment. 

Think about what it was like prior to ZT policies being enacted in our schools.  Public and private districts were being sued over inconsistent disciplinary measures, students were hesitant to report threats because disciplinary action wasn't swift or unbiased, teachers were asked to be enforcers as well as educators ... it wasn't at all an environment conducive to educators or students.  And parents didn't have a clear idea of what was expected of them or their children.

Sure, it's extreme.  But it needs to be if it is going to effectively neutralize the possibility of threatening situations.  And when you come right down to it, no zero tolerance policy will ever be enacted if no rule is broken.  No matter how stupid we might think the rules are, the school's handbooks are quite clear on what's allowed and what isn't, and students and parents are asked to sign an acknowledgment of the Code of Conduct every year.  Perhaps we need to teach our students that rules should not be broken, rather than teaching them that the loudest complaints will save their days.


----------



## Pit (Oct 15, 2009)

*Zero tolerance = zero intelligence*



DeniseM said:


> When you have a no tolerance rule, and start making exceptions, it gets really tricky...



How about:
- Students with a lug wrench in their car?
- Kids on the baseball team who keep their favorite bat in the trunk?
- Kids on the golf team who carry clubs?
- Girls who carry a nail file in their purse?

Shouldn't all these students be suspended. Or, are these weapons OK?

There is always room for discretion. The Police who were called to the school refused to take any action, as the 2" blade does not meet their definition of a weapon.


----------



## pgnewarkboy (Oct 15, 2009)

In my view the issue is not zero tolerance it is mandatory minimum sentencing.  I think that if you bring a knife or anything else to school in violation of school policy you must be in some way be penalized for violating the rule - no matter who you are.  It doesn't matter if you are rich or poor or whether you are a boy scout or a D student.

The punishment, however, should be based on the individual circumstances of the case.  Prior offenses and other matters surrounding the case should be taken into account before the punishment is set.

In our zeal to be "tough on crime" we have taken away discretion in sentencing from judges all over the nation.  That is why you have the jails filled with people who shouldn't be in jail and students being suspended from school who shouldn't be suspended.


----------



## djs (Oct 15, 2009)

A pocket knife in a car and not on a person is deemed dangerous???  Correct me if I'm wrong (and this isn't directed at any person who has posted here) but doesn't it snow pretty heavily in some parts of the country?

In upstate NY (even if some don't consider just North of Albany to be "upstate") snow can get pretty heavy.  It would seem to reason that having a knife in one's car isn't the worst idea.  Now as a different example, take someone in the Tahoe area; would having chains in their car be considered a weapon...even though on many roads it's illegal to drive w/o them?  My guess is that chains could do a heck of a lot more damage to one's face than a pocket knife.

I'm fine with rules existing, but I think there needs to be some level of common sense involved.  Someone needs to be able to come up with a reasonable idea of what the "intent" is; especially when we're talking about something that otherwise isn't illegal.  The way some school policies are written one can be expelled for giving a friend some Bayer for a headache.  That's just plain wrong.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 15, 2009)

Here's another angle - what do you think would have been the  _appropriate_ consequences for this young man, taking into consideration that the decision will set a precedence for students in the future?


----------



## PigsDad (Oct 16, 2009)

pgnewarkboy said:


> In my view the issue is not zero tolerance it is mandatory minimum sentencing.  I think that if you bring a knife or anything else to school in violation of school policy you must be in some way be penalized for violating the rule - no matter who you are.  It doesn't matter if you are rich or poor or whether you are a boy scout or a D student.
> 
> *The punishment, however, should be based on the individual circumstances of the case.*  Prior offenses and other matters surrounding the case should be taken into account before the punishment is set.


I couldn't agree more!  There is no reason that the school couldn't still have the policy of removing the student immediately, but then back that up with a *judgement *on the punishment.  But that would require some thought on behalf of those 9-month'ers...   ZT is just the easy way out.

Kurt


----------



## Pit (Oct 16, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> Here's another angle - what do you think would have been the  _appropriate_ consequences for this young man, taking into consideration that the decision will set a precedence for students in the future?



Having called in the Police, they should have followed their lead in concluding it is not a weapon. Furthermore, locked-up in his car, it is certainly no more of a threat to student safety than his girlfriends nail file, or the box cutter the janitor carries, or the tools that lay around the machine shop class, or the knives in the home ec classroom and cafeteria, or the various chemicals in the science lab, or the scalpels in biology class, etc.

If they really felt the need to do something, they should have confiscated the knife, called his parents to pick it up, and asked them to make sure it does not return to school. Not that it makes any difference, but in a few months, our government is going to ask this guy to march around campus with a machine gun.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 16, 2009)

Ok - so now you've set a precedence and either 1) it is no longer against the rules to have a small knife in your car, or 2) it is still against the rules, but there are no consequences.  Not only that, but you've sent a message to the whole student body that someone "got away with it."  

Now, what do you do when the gang banger, the cutter, the angry kid, the emotionally disturbed kid, or the scared kid, brings a knife to school in his car?  

Do you tell him, we didn't punish the honors student, but we are going to punish you, because he's an honors student and you aren't?  

Or, we hold the honors student in high esteem, so he can bring a knife to school and get away with it, but you can't? 

Or the honors student is a better person than you are so it was OK for him, but it's not OK for you? 

That's when it become discrimination, not to mention a huge legal mess, and that's why schools have zero tolerance policies about drugs, weapons, and violence.


----------



## isisdave (Oct 16, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> Now, what do you do when the gang banger, the cutter, the angry kid, the emotionally disturbed kid, or the scared kid, brings a knife to school in his car?



Well, I think you tell these people the same thing ... if it's a two-inch knife and it stays in your car, it's not a problem.

A friend of my son's works in retail, and thoughtlessly left his box cutter in his car late one night after work. Next day he came to school, and because there was litter left near his car (an open Jeep), it was noticed by whoever patrols the parking lot. He was suspended for five days, which is the prescribed penalty for first offenses.  I think this is more reasonable than 30.

When I went to school, there was a lot more use of discretion and common sense.  My friends and I probably did things that would now be considered felonies ... particularly in chemistry lab.  Of course, that was when parents supported the schools ... now you're likely to be accused of depriving darling Johnny of his rights.


----------



## pgnewarkboy (Oct 16, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> Ok - so now you've set a precedence and either 1) it is no longer against the rules to have a small knife in your car, or 2) it is still against the rules, but there are no consequences.  Not only that, but you've sent a message to the whole student body that someone "got away with it."
> 
> Now, what do you do when the gang banger, the cutter, the angry kid, the emotionally disturbed kid, or the scared kid, brings a knife to school in his car?
> 
> ...



You raise legitimate questions.  The question of punishment in society has gone on for thousands of years.  Our nation, used to have a pretty good handle on it although it has proven to be flawed in some ways. It requires investigation of the circumstances of the crime and the circumstances of the offender and the damage to the victims and the damage to society.  It takes effort and judgement and a certain amount of something we hear llittle about lately called "wisdom".  King Solomon was a great judge because of his wisdom.  

These school cases that are being publicized all shock us because the punishment does not fit "the circumstances of the crime (nobody hurt - apparently unintentional), "the circumstances of the offender (very young or exemplary behavior in all other respects), "the damage to the victims" (no victims" and "the damage to society"  (very little damage to society except that we should maintain as a society that rules be enforced or they become meaningless and people will feel free to disobey the rules).  For all these reasons, I would conclude that the children should be reprimanded for their behavior and made to understand the policy.  That is all.   Different children under different circumstances would have a different punishment.

Mindless, over harsh penalties may or may not deter the prohibited behavior.  It does however create a dislike, and distrust of the authority that enforces them.  That fosters an environment for crime.  If I were a child in one of these schools and saw the irrational punishment NOT ONLY would I not bring a knife to school, I WOULD NOT report anybody who I saw with a knife because I would be too afraid to go anywhere near the school officials.  I would correct assume that they were "nuts" and fear that I too would be suspended for some reason that nobody could understand.  Consequently, a child with a switchblade intending to do harm may be seen but not reported by other students.


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 16, 2009)

Denise, we all here what you are saying.  We are just asking the people in charge of our kids to exercise some common sense!


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

I have a feeling there is more to this story than what we've been fed by the media.  This kid was initially suspended five days according to the Zero Tolerance policy.  That makes more sense than twenty days, wouldn't we all agree, considering that he did have a prohibited object on school grounds.  The Code of Conduct appears to be clear on that.  But for whatever reason that is not being reported, during the follow-up hearing an additional fifteen days were tacked on to his suspension and now the superintendent's office is saying the decisions will not be overturned.

So everything that's being complained about in this thread was done in this case - facts were gathered and the initial punishment was reviewed to determine if it could be lessened or overturned according to policy.

It's interesting, what we're not hearing.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 16, 2009)

isisdave said:


> Well, I think you tell these people the same thing ... if it's a two-inch knife and it stays in your car, it's not a problem.



As a teacher, that's a scary idea for me.  I've been assaulted (twice) by a student, and the idea that they could have a knife in their car, terrifies me.


----------



## Pit (Oct 16, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> As a teacher, that's a scary idea for me.  I've been assaulted (twice) by a student, and the idea that they could have a knife in their car, terrifies me.



You're worried about a two inch keychain knife, but you have no concern over a baseball bat or lug wrench? ZT is not going to stop someone who wants to cause harm to others.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 16, 2009)

There was no baseball bat or lug wrench involved in this incident, so I am trying to stay on topic, instead of discussing all other possibilities.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit said:


> You're worried about a two inch keychain knife, but you have no concern over a baseball bat or lug wrench?



That knife could be concealed a whole lot easier than the bat or wrench.  It's certain that a student walking around the building with either of those will be at least questioned to assess the risk - if a kid says he's on his way to baseball practice or to change a tire, school security could easily accompany him.  And in the event that he's not questioned and makes it all the way to the point where he's raising either of those as weapons, it'd be easier for someone to grab onto the bat or wrench than a knife.


----------



## Pit (Oct 16, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> There was no baseball bat or lug wrench involved in this incident, so I am trying to stay on topic, instead of discussing all other possibilities.



One of the arguments presented here is that ZT policies must be enforced consistently, with no room for discretion on the part of school administrators. Rules are rules. One size fits all. Otherwise, the wrong message is sent.

I think its fair, then, to question why those meting out punishment are so inconsistent. Why do they not suspend students who carry other, more lethal weapons in their cars? Of course, its a rhetorical question to illustrate the completely arbitrary nature of their enforcement.

I read this morning that the kid's parents have retained an attorney. The school administrators have opened the school system up to a potential lawsuit, by applying their policy in such an arbitrary and capricious manner.


----------



## roadtriper (Oct 16, 2009)

Wow, It's sad to learn of the death of Comon Sense!   I know rules are rules but ...  it's not about the tool/weapon 

I spent most of of grades 5-12 in Public schools and had a knife in my pocket pretty much every day unless I forgot it at home.   in high school the rule on Knives was it couldn't have a blade longer than 4"   Guns were banned on Campus in High school unless you were on the school "Shooting Team"  if the faculty saw a gun in a vehicle they didn't call the swat team, the Principal would call you out of class, walk you to the vehicle,Make sure the gun wasn't loaded, talk to you about hunting for a half hour and ask you to take it home.   in a high school with aprox 500 students  I saw plenty of fights, was involved in a few myself. but never once in any of my school days did I see a knife come out as a weapon!   and the only time I saw a handgun in class it was brought by a Teacher to use in a skit he had planned, I believe it was just a stater pistol  but it was discharged in a class.

Fair enough... this was 35-40 years ago. But Knives and guns arent any more deadly that they were then.  it's a societal thing, we've raised a generation  that the majority of, don't understand respect or comon sense. RT


----------



## pianodinosaur (Oct 16, 2009)

DeniseM:

I described some of my experiences while working in Strategic Air Command in an earlier post.  The military has numerous ZT policies.  The penalties for violating these policies are severe.  I understood many of them and some I did not.  However, I was obligated to obey them.  Ignorance of the rules was not considered an excuse.

During my tour of duty I worked with an anesthesiologist who was an Air Force Academy Graduate.  This man had to be an A student in high school as well as a star athlete just to get into the Air Force Academy.  He had to be at the top of his class in the Air Force Academy just to be permitted to pursue a medical career immediately upon graduation.  He was caught stealing drugs from the anesthesia cart for his own personal recreational abuse.  He was subsequently treated just like a criminal. 

Being an honor student does not place you above the law.  This is a very important lesson that sometimes has to be learned through the school of hard knocks.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit said:


> One of the arguments presented here is that ZT policies must be enforced consistently, with no room for discretion on the part of school administrators. Rules are rules. One size fits all. Otherwise, the wrong message is sent.
> 
> I think its fair, then, to question why those meting out punishment are so inconsistent. Why do they not suspend students who carry other, more lethal weapons in their cars? Of course, its a rhetorical question to illustrate the completely arbitrary nature of their enforcement.
> 
> I read this morning that the kid's parents have retained an attorney. The school administrators have opened the school system up to a potential lawsuit, by applying their policy in such an arbitrary and capricious manner.



But, where is the inconsistency in this situation if the clearly-stated rule is that any student who has a knife on property will be subject to the punishment in accordance with the Zero Tolerance weapons policy in effect?  It seems to me the parents have hired an attorney to ask that inconsistency be applied to their son's situation.

It's one thing to ask that the rules be reviewed for what some here are calling "common sense," but the time to do that is when the Student Handbook is released during the first days of that school year and students/parents are asked to sign an acknowledgment of the policies.  It's quite another to ask that the rules be suspended or ignored only after a certain student has broken a certain rule and is now suffering the consequences.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 16, 2009)

*Common Sense Zero-Tolerance Rules.*

To keep it simple & facilitate consistency, how about anti-knife rules that say, for example, official Boy Scout knives OK, official Girl Scout knives OK, nail clippers OK, fingernail files OK, manicure scissors OK, etc. ? 

School authorities could still clamp down on kids going to school with machetes, switchblades, K-bars, daggers, scimitars, bayonets, halbards, pikes, battle axes, rapiers, cutlasses, broadswords, sharp sticks, & all like that. 

If the tough kids start misbehaving by using cutlery that's on the OK list, the assistant principal can discipline the perps via conduct rules rather than by applying zero-tolerance overkill to the implements in question. 

Just saying. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

AwayWeGo said:


> ... Just saying ...



My "just saying" take is that I'd be way more supportive of parents who would consider suing a school district because their child(ren) were harmed in a school setting in which the policies didn't prohibit any knives or guns, than of parents who consider suing because their "good" child(ren) were disciplined for bringing contraband weapons to school despite a stated rule against it.


----------



## pjrose (Oct 16, 2009)

Chiming in a bit late here.... but can confirm from personal knowledge that good kids do screw up, and there should be consequences.  When kids - good or otherwise - forget to empty their pockets of their scout knife or camping utensils or box cutter from work, there should be consequences.  In this case the consequence isn't for being a violent kid and threatening people, it's a consequence for violating the rule - even if it's not intentional.  That can help teach them to think twice and be more careful in the future.

What I'd like to see is some leeway in what those consequences will be.  Zero Tolerance is one thing, Mandatory Sentencing is another.

There still can and probably should be zero tolerance for the infraction, but the principal can try to determine the intent.  No matter what, a call home, confiscating the offending object, and some detention or suspension should be assigned. However, I wouldn't suspend for a semester or even a month for an object forgotten from work or a scout meeting the night before; for  that I would assign 3-5 days, good kid or bad kid.  

It's a tough situation, and the schools have to err on the side of caution, but consequences for all infractions, ZT or otherwise, should be applied with a dose of common sense.


----------



## Pit (Oct 16, 2009)

pianodinosaur said:


> Being an honor student does not place you above the law.  This is a very important lesson that sometimes has to be learned through the school of hard knocks.



The student in question did not violate any laws. In fact, the Police were called, and they determined the knife was not even a weapon.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 16, 2009)

AwayWeGo said:


> To keep it simple & facilitate consistency, how about anti-knife rules that say, for example, official Boy Scout knives OK, official Girl Scout knives OK, nail clippers OK, fingernail files OK, manicure scissors OK, etc.




Alan - In my 30 years of teaching, I have been assaulted twice by high school students - both boys.  One of them was handicapped, and one of them was just a total jerk.  I would not want to work at a school where ANY student is allowed to carry a knife.  Maybe in rural areas this is still the practice, but I would be stunned if this practice is allowed in any urban areas.  I can't imagine what would happen if the gang kids had knives! Honestly - there would be blood shed the first day.


----------



## Pit (Oct 16, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> But, where is the inconsistency in this situation if the clearly-stated rule is that any student who has a knife on property will be subject to the punishment in accordance with the Zero Tolerance weapons policy in effect?  It seems to me the parents have hired an attorney to ask that inconsistency be applied to their son's situation.



But, that's not what the policy states. The policy refers to weapons, not knives, and it applies to adults as well. Here is the policy...
http://www.lansingburgh.org/policies/5300.30_prohibited_student_conduct.pdf

1. The local Police determined the knife was not a weapon.
2. Even if you choose to ignore the Police, a lug wrench, baseball bat, or nail file are equally dangerous in the wrong hands.

I'll bet there are plenty of teachers carrying nail files on school property. Since they are also in violation of this policy, should they be fired? Or should common sense prevail?

It's also interesting to note, that there is nothing in the policy regarding "zero tolerance." That appears to have been fabricated by the superintendent.



> Lansingburgh Central School District Superintendent George J. Goodwin, 55, said in a written statement that his district "has an established policy of zero tolerance with respect to the possession of weapons of any kind on school property or in school buildings."
> 
> But nowhere in the school district's rule book, which is published online, is there any mention of a "zero tolerance" policy, leading some to question whether Goodwin, in fact, was compelled to suspend the youth.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit said:


> The student in question did not violate any laws. In fact, the Police were called, and they determined the knife was not even a weapon.



So he wasn't charged with breaking a state or federal law.  But neither is he serving a sentence related to any broken laws.  He did violate a clearly-stated school rule, and because of that has been subject to the affiliated disciplinary code.  Why would we expect anything different, or want any of our students to be exempt from the code?

Like I said before, there's a time to evaluate the code for flaws and suggest changes to it, but that time isn't when it serves one particular student who committed one particular violation.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Oct 16, 2009)

When our son-in-law arrived from Iraq last month, we were allowed to go to the gate to meet him.  One of the lieutenants in our son's squadron met us at the airport, got us boarding passes, and escorted us to the plane's gate.  I told my stepdad to be sure to leave his knife at our daughter's house.  He was very grateful that I remembered to ask, because his knife is his old boy scout knife/ tool combination.  

We get to the airport, and sure enough, he had another knife in his pocket, a smaller knife.  I couldn't believe he was carrying around ANOTHER knife.  Our son chose to stay back and wait before the security point, so his grandpa wouldn't lose his beloved knife.  

Two knives that are sentimental, and they are so sentimental, he has no idea he has one in his pocket.  Time to take one out permanently, in my opinion.  

Dear man, but he is starting to act his age.  He has always been very young for his age, and still is physically, but his forgetfulness is catching up to him. 

As for a ZT policy, I think it's okay, as long as the kids KNOW all of the rules, and they aren't made up as they go along.  Mistakes happen, most assuredly, but maybe all students should sign a contract that has the rules, and they must re-state each rule on a blank line underneath the line.  Then the contract should be kept in the principal's office, to pull out in this kind of situation.  It puts the responsibility of the understanding back on the student.  Very important.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 16, 2009)

*Trustworthy Helpful Friendly Courteous Kind Obedient Thrifty Brave Clean & Reverent.*




DeniseM said:


> Alan - In my 30 years of teaching, I have been assaulted twice by high school students - both boys.  One of them was handicapped, and one of them was just a total jerk.  I would not want to work at a school where ANY student is allowed to carry a knife.  Maybe in rural areas this is still the practice, but I would be stunned if this practice is allowed in any urban areas.  I can't imagine what would happen if the gang kids had knives! Honestly - there would be blood shed the first day.


OK, then -- what about making official Boy Scout knives OK for bona fide Boy Scouts in good standing & official Girl Scout knives OK for bona fide Girl Scouts in good standing, but keeping all Scout knives on the zero-tolerance _No-No_ list for non-Scouts ? 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## NWL (Oct 16, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> Alan - In my 30 years of teaching, I have been assaulted twice by high school students - both boys.  One of them was handicapped, and one of them was just a total jerk.  I would not want to work at a school where ANY student is allowed to carry a knife.  Maybe in rural areas this is still the practice, but I would be stunned if this practice is allowed in any urban areas.  I can't imagine what would happen if the gang kids had knives! Honestly - there would be blood shed the first day.



I live in a very rural area, and our 350 student high school does have a policy about guns and knives on campus.  None are allowed on campus, period.  Still, there are always 1 or 2 students who show up at school with their hunting rifles clearly displayed in the gun rack in the window of their truck.  The administration has consistently imposed the stated punishment regardless of the students' "intent".  I applaud their consistent enforcement of the policy.

In regards to the severity of the punishment, maybe a distinction could be made between a weapon being in the car as opposed to a student carrying the weapon into the school.  The latter would show intent to use the weapon.

Cheers!


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit said:


> But, that's not what the policy states. The policy refers to weapons, not knives, and it applies to adults as well. Here is the policy...
> http://www.lansingburgh.org/policies/5300.30_prohibited_student_conduct.pdf
> 
> 1. The local Police determined the knife was not a weapon.
> ...



I believe this kid was made an example of, due to his shall we say, "career choices".  I spelled it out more succinctly earlier, but posts such as those were deleted.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 16, 2009)

*Not Necessarily.*




laurac260 said:


> I believe this kid was made an example of, due to his shall we say, "career choices".  I spelled it out more succinctly earlier, but posts such as those were deleted.


Maybe it wasn't exactly that. 

I mean, if the guy was viewed by the "in" crowd as goody 2 shoes or (heaven forfend) an Eagle Scout, then there would be plenty of folks who had it in for him & might gladly seize the chance to knock him down a peg. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 16, 2009)

AwayWeGo said:


> Maybe it wasn't exactly that.
> 
> I mean, if the guy was viewed by the "in" crowd as goody 2 shoes or (heaven forfend) an Eagle Scout, then there would be plenty of folks who had it in for him & might gladly seize the chance to knock him down a peg.
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​



kids maybe, but the school super???


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit said:


> But, that's not what the policy states. The policy refers to weapons, not knives, and it applies to adults as well. Here is the policy...
> http://www.lansingburgh.org/policies/5300.30_prohibited_student_conduct.pdf
> 
> 1. The local Police determined the knife was not a weapon.
> ...



The clearly-stated policy forbids weapons, with no qualifier of a police officer's judgment being the determining factor for what does and doesn't constitute a weapon.  Common sense tells me that it will be much easier in a school setting to use a knife as weapon than it will be to use a baseball bat or a lug wrench, especially because a knife can be concealed and because it is much easier to grab either of those implements than the knife during an altercation.



Pit said:


> It's also interesting to note, that there is nothing in the policy regarding "zero tolerance." That appears to have been fabricated by the superintendent.



You're right - I was wrong in that a defined Zero Tolerance policy isn't clearly-stated.  But if every incidence of possession of a knife or other weapon since the adoption of the stated disciplinary code has been subject to the same severe penalty, then the superintendent is correct in saying that there is an established zero tolerance policy.  If others weren't subject to the same punishment, then I can see questioning his statement and/or what happened here.

And I still want to know why the initial 5-day suspension was increased to 20-days.  Were there circumstances that would justify it, that we haven't been told because it would remove some of the sensationalism aspect of the story?  Or did the media involvement force the school board/superintendent to defend their actions beyond reason?  I don't know.   

I am honestly confused here.  My kids aren't so far removed from high school (6-7 years) but I wanted the strict rules and disciplinary code to be enforced.  Like you say, you can't always stop someone hellbent on destruction.  But it's common sense to me that we support whatever minimizes the risk of violence to our students and teachers, so that the purpose of the school - education - can take place as safely as possible.  It used to be that a case-by-case disciplinary code was enforced, and our schools became targets for increasingly violent behavior as well as discrimination lawsuits because of it.

It seems to me that we've led ourselves to this point of zero tolerance, by forcing our educators to back down in the past from what were reasonable disciplinary measures.  If we hadn't insisted that the school boards/superintendents reverse justifiable punishments by brandishing the "I'll sue you for damaging my precious snowflake" nonsense, then maybe they wouldn't have had to resort to an all-or-none system that doesn't and can't make allowances for extenuating circumstances.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 16, 2009)

*Adults Should Be The Ones Whose Behavior Is Mature.*




laurac260 said:


> kids maybe, but the school super?


If the school authorities had any such motivation, then shux on'm. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## pianodinosaur (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit:

Your points are well taken.  However, there are many offenses in the military system that would not be considered an offense in the civilian sector.  Obesity is a good example.  It is not a crime to be overweight in the civilian sector.  However, if a commanding office orders you to lose weight and you do not lose weight, you may just find yourself in a military prison. 

So, I would maintain that many of our laws are stupid and that many rules in the high school student code of conduct are stupid.  However, this young man wants to go to West Point.  If you think that some of our civilian laws are stupid and that some of the rules in the high school student code of conduct are stupid, they look like total sanity compared what this young man is about to experience.  This is a relatively cheap lesson.  They call this character building in the military.


----------



## Pit (Oct 16, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> The clearly-stated policy forbids weapons, with no qualifier of a police officer's judgment being the determining factor for what does and doesn't constitute a weapon.  *Common sense * tells me that it will be much easier in a school setting to use a knife as weapon than it will be to use a baseball bat or a lug wrench, especially because a knife can be concealed and because it is much easier to grab either of those implements than the knife during an altercation.



It seems you are now arguing for the application of "common sense," but ZT does not allow for such a discretion, does it? I'm all in favor of common sense, and that's what is so clearly lacking in this instance.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit said:


> It seems you are now arguing for the application of "common sense," but ZT does not allow for such a discretion, does it? I'm all in favor of common sense, and that's what is so clearly lacking in this instance.



Actually, I think that what constitutes common sense isn't so clearcut and that's why this discussion goes round and round and round ...

Weapons are weapons, period.  If a school district wants to establish a disciplinary code that bans all weapons and assigns strict punishments to related infractions, that's common sense to me.

I can't tell what's common sense for you - are you advocating having the police determine what constitutes a weapon, or having certain knives not classified as weapons because other implements can be as dangerous as those knives, or having every- and anything under the sun that can be used to cause harm classified as a weapon?

Okay, that's an exaggeration.  It's quite clear that you think it's important to quantify the intent when considering every incident that might constitute a disciplinary infraction in a school setting.  And I would agree with such a system, IF history hadn't taught us that there are students who would suffer more than others in such a system because other students and their parents have a sense of entitlement that overrules their common sense.  That could and did result in a lack of safety in our schools, and that's the bottom line reason for zero tolerance policies.


----------



## pjrose (Oct 16, 2009)

I'm arguing zero tolerance for the infraction, with a range of disciplinary action.  A consequence is mandatory; what that consequence will be can be determined according to the individual circumstance. 

We have zero tolerance for murder, but the punishment could range from 10-20 years to Capital Punishment.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> ... As for a ZT policy, I think it's okay, as long as the kids KNOW all of the rules, and they aren't made up as they go along.  Mistakes happen, most assuredly, but maybe all students should sign a contract that has the rules, and they must re-state each rule on a blank line underneath the line.  Then the contract should be kept in the principal's office, to pull out in this kind of situation.  It puts the responsibility of the understanding back on the student.  Very important.



This is how our schools approached it, in the private elementary school that our kids attended in Boston and in the public system here in the suburb.  (Maybe it's a Massachusetts law?  I don't know.)  The kids brought home the Student Handbook (Boston) / Code of Conduct (surburb) on the first day of school along with a paper that required student and parent signatures saying that the student and parent(s) read the booklet and understood that discipline would be enforced according to it.  We got daily reminders until that signed paper was returned to the school.  Following Columbine, the handbooks increased by a number of pages and the punishments increased for anything related to safety.  Following 9/11, there were more increases related to lockdown procedures and visitor identification.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

pjrose said:


> I'm arguing zero tolerance for the infraction, with a range of disciplinary action.  A consequence is mandatory; what that consequence will be can be determined according to the individual circumstance.
> 
> We have zero tolerance for murder, but the punishment might 10-20 years or Capital Punishment.



Yes, that!


----------



## nightnurse613 (Oct 16, 2009)

Of course, punishing a person for having a knife locked up in his car is as dangerous as the young men of the Columbine massacre - those were just guns, rifles and they were carried - undetected - on to campus.  I prefer not to have to choose but, if I had to I have less fear of the knife (although either one could kill me) - especially if it's parked in the school parking lot.  We had a similar problem here, a student  on an Olympic team went straight from the shooting range to school.  Too bad he wasn't on the swim team, huh?


----------



## Pit (Oct 16, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> Weapons are weapons, period.  If a school district wants to establish a disciplinary code that bans all weapons and assigns strict punishments to related infractions, that's common sense to me.



So, what is a weapon? Is a baseball bat a weapon? A lug wrench? A 2" knife? A 6" nail file? Scissors?

If the Police say it is not a weapon, then how did the school determine that it is a weapon -- meanwhile ignoring all the lug wrenches in the parking lot? This is not a consistent application of policy. This kid was singled out for harassment.


----------



## Pit (Oct 16, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> I can't tell what's common sense for you - are you advocating having the police determine what constitutes a weapon, or having certain knives not classified as weapons because other implements can be as dangerous as those knives, or having every- and anything under the sun that can be used to cause harm classified as a weapon?



I think the rule that out to apply here is the "reasonable person standard." It's pretty clear (to me) that this kid does not deserve this treatment, and to just sweep it under the rug with the excuse that "rules are rules" is a completely inadequate handling of the situation.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Oct 16, 2009)

From Fox News website: 

N.Y. superintendent who upheld suspension of Eagle Scout for pocketknife in car won't budge — but nowhere in school district's rule book is 'zero tolerance' mentioned.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 16, 2009)

*Well, Shux.*




Pit said:


> I think the rule that out to apply here is the "reasonable person standard."


That pretty much leaves me out. 

So it goes. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit said:


> So, what is a weapon? Is a baseball bat a weapon? A lug wrench? A 2" knife? A 6" nail file? Scissors?
> 
> If the Police say it is not a weapon, then how did the school determine that it is a weapon -- meanwhile ignoring all the lug wrenches in the parking lot? This is not a consistent application of policy. This kid was singled out for harassment.



I'll agree somewhat that without a definition of "weapon" in the code, there can be questions about what constitutes a weapon.  But I'd be more inclined to add objects to the list of banned items than subtract.  However, if other similar knives have been classified as weapons and similar punishments have been handed out for those, there's no question at all in my mind about the disciplinary measures for this kid.

But I don't know if other similar infractions have occurred, and neither do you.  Sure, it's possible that the school is being too heavy-handed with this kid as compared to others who faced the same situation, but that claim hasn't been made. The complaint is that the punishment doesn't fit the crime, and I'm assuming that most folks would make that complaint no matter the student involved.  In other words, it's not the particular student involved that makes the punishment ridiculous, it's the idea that this particular knife is considered a weapon.  It very well could be that this kid is facing too severe a punishment, but it nags at me that the original reasonable 5-day suspension was increased to a 20-day and we don't know why.

If you are making the claim that the punishment is ridiculous because of the particular student involved, and it's a concentrated effort to single him out and harrass him, what makes you think so?  What's been reported that leads to it?


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 16, 2009)

Pit said:


> I think the rule that out to apply here is the "reasonable person standard." It's pretty clear (to me) that this kid does not deserve this treatment, and to just sweep it under the rug with the excuse that "rules are rules" is a completely inadequate handling of the situation.



Well as I said in that same post, historically schools have had to suffer backlash from students and parents who have not applied a reasonable standard to their own behavior.  It's a shame, I agree, that the worst behavior of some brought about an all-or-none extreme disciplinary code.  But the way I see it, schools are damned if they do punish (by lawsuit-happy parents) and damned if they don't (by lax safety standards that invite society's overall increasing levels of violence,) so they may as well err on the side of caution.

Aren't you the least bit curious about why, when the situation was reviewed after the initial decision, the punishment was increased??  I'm not clear at all about what this kid deserves, except that if the superintendent has been truthful about the school's established policies, then there will be a record to back up his actions.


----------



## pgnewarkboy (Oct 16, 2009)

I think the whole idea of lawsuit happy parents is way overstated.  I would not be at all suprised if there were tens of thousands of disciplinary actions against students every year - nationwide.  Most parents don't have the time or the means or the desire to sue.  I am sure that the number of lawsuits is miniscule by parents for discipline against their children.  

The remote possibility that you might be sued is no justification for thoughtlessly enforcing draconian punishments when they are not deserved.  One of the fundamental human beliefs is that the punishment should fit the crime.  I believe it is universal across cultures.  If the punishment is too severe or too lax people are shocked and lose faith in their institutions and leaders.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada (Oct 17, 2009)

A few years back another honor student, actually valedictorian was not allowed to graduate with her class because she had a knife in the truck she was driving due to it having been used by her parents for moving and the knife fell out and was not discovered previously. Younger children have been suspended for bringing a plastic knife with their lunch to cut their chicken. I understand what Denise is saying about consistency, especially with high schoolers who are always looking for a reason to cry "unfair!", but I too decry the loss of common sense. Once when teaching second grade I had a student bring me a pocket knife that he had in his backpack from camping. I think I just kept it for him, (it was a long time ago and my memory gets fuzzy) or maybe I took it to the office and asked them to have his parents pick it up at the end of the day. The student brought it to me because he knew it was a mistake to have it, to me that signals intent. If he had been suspended the lesson learned would be to not take the knife to the teacher when you discovered, but hope you don't get caught. 
Liz


----------



## icydog (Oct 17, 2009)

rickandcindy23 said:


> Back in 1968, my friend brought her dad's gun to school and kept it in her purse for several weeks, showing it to everyone like it was a badge of honor.
> 
> She was never caught, and I think I should have probably said something, at least to her dad, but I was only 13 and didn't think it through.  I just knew she would never hurt anyone, she just thought she was being cool.  I don't even know if she had ammunition.
> 
> I am still friends with her today, and she will admit it was a bonehead thing to do.



When I was 5 I brought our family heirloom, a revolutionary gun, to school for show and tell. All the teachers loved it, except for one old fuddy-duddy who said children should not be carrying guns. 
1. Since I could not make ammunition there was little chance of shooting anything. Ammunition in those days was handmade
2. It was an artifact and should have been a treasure to behold
3. The old fuddy-duddy was probably a Tory
4. My mother gave the rifle to my brother in law, who gave it to my impaired nephew, never to be seen again.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 17, 2009)

*Which Was Never Seen Again ?*




icydog said:


> My mother gave the rifle to my brother in law, who gave it to my impaired nephew, never to be seen again.


The heirloom? 

Or the nephew ? 

( Or both ? ) 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 17, 2009)

Too bad schools don't enforce the DRESS CODE as vigorously!


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 17, 2009)

laurac260 said:


> Too bad schools don't enforce the DRESS CODE as vigorously!



Our Dist. does, but it got completely out of control before they tightened things  up.  A funny story - we had parents' meetings to go over the new dress code rules, and this mom stands up and complains long and loud about the new rules that will violate her daughter's civil rights.  It was a crack up, because "mom" was sporting at least 4 dress code violations herself - and she apparently thought that was appropriate dress for a meeting at school!


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 17, 2009)

*Harper Valley PTA ?*




DeniseM said:


> It was a crack up, because "mom" was sporting at least 4 dress code violations herself - and she apparently thought that was appropriate dress for a meeting at school!


You mean, wearing a miniskirt that just barely covered her _this_ & _that_ ? 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## pjrose (Oct 17, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> Our Dist. does, but it got completely out of control before they tightened things  up.  A funny story - we had parents' meetings to go over the new dress code rules, and this mom stands up and complains long and loud about the new rules that will violate her daughter's civil rights.  It was a crack up, because "mom" was sporting at least 4 dress code violations herself - and she apparently thought that was appropriate dress for a meeting at school!



Sounds like another "hoochie mama" - see #32 toward the end of the Bar Mitzvah thread!


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 17, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> Our Dist. does, but it got completely out of control before they tightened things  up.  A funny story - we had parents' meetings to go over the new dress code rules, and this mom stands up and complains long and loud about the new rules that will violate her daughter's civil rights.  It was a crack up, because "mom" was sporting at least 4 dress code violations herself - and she apparently thought that was appropriate dress for a meeting at school!



That's great Denise!  Don't you wish we could have ZT for those women who insist on wearing their daughter's clothes?   By the way, can you share the 4 dress code violations?


----------



## pjrose (Oct 17, 2009)

let me guess:

cleavage, too tight, too short, and spaghetti straps ???    

Denise, do tell!


----------



## AwayWeGo (Oct 17, 2009)

*Photographically ?*




laurac260 said:


> By the way, can you share the 4 dress code violations?


A picture is worth 1*,*000 words. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA,​


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 17, 2009)

As I recall, her violations were: cleavage, too short, spaghetti straps, and undergarments showing.  And yes, the Hoochie Mama post made me think of it!  Our principal did a masterful job of keeping a straight face!


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 17, 2009)

pjrose said:


> let me guess:
> 
> cleavage, too tight, too short, and spaghetti straps ???
> 
> Denise, do tell!



I was once in the Cheesecake Factory, and a very young (early 20's), very skinny girl was standing in the lobby with her back(side) to me.  As little as she was, she still managed to find a pair of pants that allowed a full 1-2 inches of her butt crack to show.  I said, "Excuse me miss, but your BUTT is sticking out!" (my 6 year old daughter was with me).  She said, "ohh, I'm sorry.  These pants are just too big."  Uh huh....sure they are.   My daughter is almost 9 now, and she cringes when I see a woman wearing one of those "dresses" that looks like a shirt with no pants, because she knows what I am going to say, out loud.  "Oh my, I think that woman forgot her PANTS!"


----------



## laurac260 (Oct 17, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> As I recall, her violations were: cleavage, too short, spaghetti straps, and undergarments showing.  And yes, the Hoochie Mama post made me thing of it!  Our principal did a masterful job of keeping a straight face!



My husband once had to "counsel" an employee because she came to work, everyday, with her areolas visibly showing.  He still cringes when I bring it up.


----------



## pjrose (Oct 17, 2009)

laurac260 said:


> My daughter is almost 9 now, and she cringes when I see a woman wearing one of those "dresses" that looks like a shirt with no pants, because she knows what *I am going to say, out loud.  "Oh my, I think that woman forgot her PANTS!"*



Oh, I wish I could be nearby to hear that!  :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 17, 2009)

AwayWeGo said:


> A picture is worth 1*,*000 words.
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA,​



I'm sorry, Alan - no can do, but the next time I see a Hoochie Mama at school, I will whip out the digital camera!


----------



## pjrose (Oct 18, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> I'm sorry, Alan - no can do, but the next time I see a Hoochie Mama at school, I will whip out the digital camera!



I doubt that our family will ever forget the one a few rows behind us on a plane - little black dress (VERY little), spike heels, very bleached blond hair, with an adorable little boy in a blue blazer and slacks.  

She spent most of her time loudly asking for drinks, complaining to the flight attendants, flirting with the man next to her, and telling her little boy to be quiet and leave her alone  .  I finally turned around and asked her to please be quieter, to the cheers and applause of those around us.    Poor little boy.


----------



## Stressy (Oct 18, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> As I recall, her violations were: cleavage, too short, spaghetti straps, and undergarments showing.  And yes, the Hoochie Mama post made me think of it!  Our principal did a masterful job of keeping a straight face!



Add Stiletto heels and this is exactly the way 2 of the 3 Kindergartern teachers at my school dress.....NO LIE! You should see the reactions of the Fathers when they drop off Junior for the first day of school!  They grab those volunteer forms like nobody's business.


----------



## pjrose (Oct 18, 2009)

Stressy said:


> Add Stiletto heels and this is exactly the way 2 of the 3 Kindergartern teachers at my school dress.....NO LIE! You should see the reactions of the Fathers when they drop off Junior for the first day of school!  They grab those volunteer forms like nobody's business.



I think I'd make a comment to the principal.


----------



## John Cummings (Oct 18, 2009)

Luanne said:


> And what about the first grader who was facing a possible 45 days in a juvenile detention center for bringing his "spork", which is his favorite camping utensil, to school?



Did you see the interviews with the 6 year old boy? He was very impressive.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada (Oct 18, 2009)

Darn! I knew I was missing something when trying to get parent volunteers!
Liz


----------



## Rose Pink (Oct 19, 2009)

laurac260 said:


> ahh, the good ole' days when kids would just INVENT their own fun!!! My dad said that when he was a kid they used to make sling shots out of old bicycle tires and just the right kind of tree branch. And yes, I do remember making those rubberband arrows. Good times!


 
I did not mean my post to imply that it was okay for these disturbed kids to make these weapons.  Other kids were terrified and I was not comfortable with the thought of someone being stuck in the eye with a pin, either.  I meant my post to illustrate that anything can become a weapon in the wrong hands.  These particular kids had issues and this was not just them having creative fun.


----------



## Rose Pink (Oct 19, 2009)

Icarus said:


> Why do we insisting on making the Eagle Scout and future military man part of this story?
> 
> 
> -David


 
David, I've thought alot about this statement and I find I have to agree with you.  It doesn't matter.  I have a son who earned his Eagle and another who came very close.  Both are in the military.  Both are human and can make wrong choices.  Their accomplishments and aspirations do not place them above the "law."  The news is filled with good people gone wrong:  Sunday school teachers who rob banks, priests who molest children and so on.  It simply does not matter that this young man is an Eagle Scout nor that he wants to go to military school.

What continues to baffle me is that I cannot see where this young man broke any rules.  If I understand the school's policy, weapons are not allowed.  This young man did not have a weapon.  He had a tool.  I think too many people are assuming a knife is always a weapon--it is most definitely not.  A pair of sewing shears is much more likely to inflict serious or deadly harm than a Boy Scout tool.  Are the home ec students suspended for having shears?

In my neck of the woods, we are always being told by local, state and federal agencies to have 72 hour emergency kits.  We are told to have them in our homes, at our places of work and _school_, as well as in our _cars_.


----------



## Talent312 (Oct 19, 2009)

Liz Wolf-Spada said:


> Darn! I knew I was missing something when trying to get parent volunteers!
> Liz



What I want to know: Where were these "ladies" when I was in school?
Most of my teachers all seemed to be cross-eyed, spinster types.


----------



## Stricky (Oct 19, 2009)

Great discussion everyone...

I think ZT takes it way too far and causes a false sense of security. Let’s face it, if a student wants to bring in a weapon and harm a teacher or student they are in no way going to be affected by ZT rules.

So who is affected? The average kid who might make a stupid decision to bring in something to show it off or scare someone. So they have to think about the consequences. Is it worth a 20 day suspension if I get caught? Could I do it and not get caught? Most school district make the punishment large enough to try to make the student think twice about their decision. Again, we are not talking about kids that have an intent to do harm. 

So wouldn't a 2 day suspension and confiscation of the weapon work? Again wouldn't that deter most good kids from doing it?  

On a side note... I totally blame the lawyers out there.  I am friends with our school superintendant. Most people would be completely appalled and surprised at the number of open lawsuits against our district. From inappropriate hugs (male or female these days), unsafe playgrounds, food issues, civil rights issues. It really is out of hand.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 19, 2009)

I agree, the frivolous lawsuits are partially to blame.  They drain resources even when they're thrown out or a judgment isn't filed against the school system.  But prior to zero tolerance policies, unequal and discriminatory discipline resulted in justifiable lawsuits that cost the school systems much more than the frivolous lawsuits do/did.

What's happening in our schools is similar to what's happening with TSA regulations, isn't it?  I used to be able to take hand-sewing projects on a plane and the needles/scissors weren't looked at twice.  Same for knitting - it was common to see passengers passing the time with that.  But now every little thing that has half a chance of being used as a weapon is confiscated.  Common sense tells us it's overkill, but history tells us that erring on the side of caution makes more sense.

That leaves the school systems in the position of having to regulate what might be innocent personal implements as weapons, but haven't they always regulated the tools in shop and home ec classes?  Way back in the 70's we had to sign tools in and out of the "cage" in the middle of shop class and if you harmed someone with a shop tool, it was classified as a "weapon" and could get you expelled.

Today most zero tolerance policies in schools (whether defined or established) do allow for a review after the situation is immediately diffused.  Sometimes it is correct to reduce a punishment, no question, but I'm convinced that happens when it should without the "help" of sensationalized news stories and hysterical public opinion.  Especially since the stories don't always contain all of the relevant details.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 19, 2009)

Susan - the airline analogy is excellent.  

If an adult accidentally took a contraband item on a plane, say a pocketknife,  and was caught with it, would you say they shouldn't have any concequences because their intent was innocent, or would you say they should have known better?

BTW - When I taught Home Ec. I had to check the knives in and out every period, or the kids would smuggle them out of the room!


----------



## John Cummings (Oct 19, 2009)

I wonder how they would handle the kids at one of the schools I went to back in the 50's. I went to a 1 room school with one teacher for grades 1-6 in Windermere, BC Canada. We had no indoor plumbing so there were 2 outhouses which were a lot of fun when it was 20 degrees below zero. There was a large pot bellied stove in the corner of the classroom for heat. We had between 18-25 kids in school depending on who felt like going to school that day. There were kids 16 years old in grades 4-6. Often the older kids would bring .22 bullets to school and throw them in the stove when the teacher wasn't looking. Needless to say, that was rather exciting and scared the teacher to death. We always got the new teachers and they never lasted more than a year, if that long. There were all other kinds of shenanigans going on. All of the boys had pocket knives.


----------



## Stricky (Oct 19, 2009)

> Especially since the stories don't always contain all of the relevant details.



That is very true!


I disagree on the TSA analogy but I will save that for a different thread


----------



## ScoopKona (Oct 19, 2009)

When I was in school, I was on the trap and skeet team, and brought a SHOTGUN to school once a week.

Best story about that is when my German teacher saw me walking down the hall with my shotgun case and said, "I didn't know you played trombone."

"It's not a trombone, it's a 12-gauge."

"C'mon," she said. "You can't bring a gun to school."

"Yes I can. I'm on the trap team. I even lettered in trap."

"Where's the ammunition," she asked.

I opened my backpack and showed her a brick of shells. She ran down the hall, screaming. The principal had to calm her down.

I bet there aren't many trap teams left in high-school America.


----------



## geekette (Oct 19, 2009)

ScoopLV said:


> When I was in school, I was on the trap and skeet team, and brought a SHOTGUN to school once a week.
> 
> Best story about that is when my German teacher saw me walking down the hall with my shotgun case and said, "I didn't know you played trombone."
> 
> ...



I think there are, they just go by another name


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 19, 2009)

geekette said:


> I think there are, they just go by another name



At our school we have two teams - the "Red Team" and the "Blue Team"!   

It is a very popular extracurricular activity and members are especially proud of their colors!


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 19, 2009)

Geeeze, some of what I read on TUG is so _foreign_!  Skeet shooting in school? 

My sophomore year was the first year of school desegregation/forced busing in Boston.  I went to one of the three exam schools in the city that were exempt from racial quotas, but there wasn't one school in the whole system that had any activities that were even remotely connected to shooting or guns.  (That's unless you count the TPF police that surrounded the buildings every morning and afternoon to protect us from the stuff thrown at school and T buses.)

(found a picture ...)


----------



## Rose Pink (Oct 20, 2009)

Many posts have mentioned ZT-zero tolerance.  I don't think I necessarily have a problem with that as long as it is outlined in specifics.  Again, if I read the posts correctly, the school policy  has a ZT to weapons.  That leaves the interpretation of "weapon" wide open to the administrators.  They could decide randomly what they do and do not consider a weapon based on who they do and do not like, who they do and do not consider a problem child, etc.  If the policy said "blades of any type" then this young man would be in violation as would dozens of others but the policy does not say that.

The police were called in according to earlier posts in this thread.  Why?  Is that policy, too?  Who called them?  What jurisdiction did they have?  Local town police?  Police assigned specifically to that school or district?  Swat Team?  Anyway, apparently they determined the young man's Boy Scout tool was not a weapon but their expert opinion was ignored.  I would think the police who are trained in weapons, assault, threat of risk, etc would be more qualified to determine what is and is not a weapon.

I wonder if this young man has been giving off some sort of vibe that made the administrators wary of his intentions.  Sure hope we get to hear the rest of the story.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 20, 2009)

Rose Pink said:


> Many posts have mentioned ZT-zero tolerance.  I don't think I necessarily have a problem with that as long as it is outlined in specifics.  Again, if I read the posts correctly, the school policy  has a ZT to weapons.  That leaves the interpretation of "weapon" wide open to the administrators.  They could decide randomly what they do and do not consider a weapon based on who they do and do not like, who they do and do not consider a problem child, etc.  If the policy said "blades of any type" then this young man would be in violation as would dozens of others but the policy does not say that.
> 
> The police were called in according to earlier posts in this thread.  Why?  Is that policy, too?  Who called them?  What jurisdiction did they have?  Local town police?  Police assigned specifically to that school or district?  Swat Team?  Anyway, apparently they determined the young man's Boy Scout tool was not a weapon but their expert opinion was ignored.  I would think the police who are trained in weapons, assault, threat of risk, etc would be more qualified to determine what is and is not a weapon.
> 
> I wonder if this young man has been giving off some sort of vibe that made the administrators wary of his intentions.  Sure hope we get to hear the rest of the story.



Rose, I think a zero tolerance policy gives school administrators great leeway in determining what does or doesn't constitute a "weapon," but it removes the randomness of some students being punished more than others.  If you think of zero tolerance as "no exceptions" then pretty much any knives can be classified as weapons, and every similar infraction earns a similar punishment regardless of the circumstances or student involved.  It's pretty much a one-size-fits-all policy that provides, for example, "any weapons violation earns minimum X #days suspension."

I'm not sure either why the police became involved in this particular situation, but I can understand why their definition of what constitutes a "weapon" might not be accepted in a school setting.  The police are limited to what's defined in the legal codes, aren't they?  Otherwise, they'd be able to arrest anyone out there who has a pocketknife on his/her keychain, and we all agree that's a ridiculous standard for the overall society.  But the goal of zero tolerance is to make a school setting more safe than the overall society which means stricter regulations need to be enforced.  That translates to the administrators being able to interpret a stated "no weapons" to "all knives, no exceptions."

It would be good to have the rest of this story, but I'm enjoying the overall ZT discussion anyway.


----------



## Rose Pink (Oct 21, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> Rose, I think a zero tolerance policy gives school administrators *great leeway in determining what does or doesn't constitute a "weapon," but it removes the randomness of some students being punished more than others*. If you think of zero tolerance as "no exceptions" then pretty much any knives can be classified as weapons, and every similar infraction earns a similar punishment regardless of the circumstances or student involved. It's pretty much a one-size-fits-all policy that provides, for example, "any weapons violation earns minimum X #days suspension."
> 
> I'm not sure either why the police became involved in this particular situation, but I can understand why their definition of what constitutes a "weapon" might not be accepted in a school setting. *The police are limited to what's defined in the legal codes, aren't they? Otherwise, they'd be able to arrest anyone out there who has a pocketknife* on his/her keychain, and we all agree *that's a ridiculous standard* for the overall society. But the goal of zero tolerance is to make a school setting more safe than the overall society which means stricter regulations need to be enforced. That translates to the administrators being able to interpret a stated "no weapons" to "all knives, no exceptions."
> 
> It would be good to have the rest of this story, but I'm enjoying the overall ZT discussion anyway.


 
Sue, we are going to have to agree to disagree.  As I see it, giving "great leeway" in what constitutes a weapon does _not_ lend itself to "remov[ing] the randomness of some students being punished more than others" but exactly the opposite.  An administrator can decide that this item is a weapon and that one is not.  That is very random.  If, however, the policy spells out blades (just as an example) then any kind of blade--without exception--would be a violation and that removes any randomness or personality issues.  

I'm not sure that what is "ridiculous" for overall society is totally acceptable for school.   I would agree that schools and minors can be expected to adhere to stricter regulations but there should be some sort of continuum of thought, not some random (and it is completely random in my mind) interpretation of the rules.  Thankfully, police are limited to "what's defined in legal codes" and so should schools.  The codes may be stricter in schools, but students and administrators should have to abide by them and not interpret them to suit personal tastes.  (Of course, I do understand that we are all human, and as such we are all limited by personal intrepretation of eveything around us, but we should try to be logical and fair.)  There is just too much emotion (vs logic) surrounding a blade.  Are you any less dead if you get strangled by tube socks than if you get stabbed by a two-inch blade?  There is just too much hysteria about blades, here.


----------



## Stricky (Oct 21, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> At our school we have two teams - the "Red Team" and the "Blue Team"!
> 
> It is a very popular extracurricular activity and members are especially proud of their colors!




A trap team at your school might do some good. If nothing else it might thin out the ranks of the Red and Blue teams. Actually that might make a good movie...  "Trapped in the Hood" starring Jim Carey as an inner city teacher who unites his gang ridden school by starting a trap shooting club.


----------



## Rose Pink (Oct 21, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> Geeeze, some of what I read on TUG is so _foreign_! Skeet shooting in school?


 
Some of what you and others describe is what is foreign to me. I see movies about gang schools but I didn't go to one. I think it is becoming more common but not every school is under armed guard. 

As far as checking tools in and out of the cage as someone said, that may be true for shop tools and maybe even expensive culinary knives but that wasn't the case for my sewing class back in the '70s nor for my children's sewing classes back in the 90s. Everyone had to have their own sewing supplies, including shears with 5 or 6 inch blades.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 21, 2009)

Rose Pink said:


> Some of what you and others describe is what is foreign to me. I see movies about gang schools but I didn't go to one. I think it is becoming more common but not every school is under armed guard.



Schools have changed dramatically since we were in school.  After what happened at Columbine, all schools were forced to re-examine their rules and security.  I teach in Modesto, which is not exactly inner-city and we have armed police officers at our school every day - they work at our school - that's their job.  That is becoming the norm.  And I'm glad they are here - I don't want gang members to be the only ones at school with a gun!


----------



## pjrose (Oct 21, 2009)

*Some more current examples*

DD and DS's school is a well-off suburban school, large, high college-attendance rates, lots of honors courses, etc, but there is also a huge range of kids.  

A boy we know - good kid - was suspended for 6 months for a scout knife in his pocket.  There are two stories: What he says is that he left it in his pants from a scout meeting the night before.  Rumor has it that a day before the boys at his lunch table were talking about hunting and cutting up carcasses, so he brought in his knife to show that he had one too. According to the second story he wasn't brandishing it, just providing evidence that he had one.    Knowing him, either story fits.  Either way, he was out for six months, at home and going to a tutor.

In the sewing classes, scissors are provided and all pairs must be returned and counted by the teacher before the class is dismissed.

The cafeteria has gone to plastic silverware - supposedly b/c of metal ones being thrown in the trash, but ???

The school has a detention or "alternative education" wing - a half-dozen classrooms, a few designated teachers, and an office for a juvenile probation officer.  This year the school added an on-site police officer who walks the halls of the entire school and attends school events.  (The school is trying to pitch the police officer as more of a school and community-relations thing, come to her if you need help, and so forth.)


----------



## John Cummings (Oct 21, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> Schools have changed dramatically since we were in school.  After what happened at Columbine, all schools were forced to re-examine their rules and security.  I teach in Modesto, which is not exactly inner-city and we have armed police officers at our school every day - they work at our school - that's their job.  That is becoming the norm.  And I'm glad they are here - I don't want gang members to be the only ones at school with a gun!



Modesto has a very high crime rate and gang problems. I think it is the exception rather than the rule compared to most communities. We don't have armed police officers in any of our schools.


----------



## DeniseM (Oct 21, 2009)

John - I don't think so.  In urban areas, I bet more schools have police officers assigned to high school campuses, than don't.  In our area, most high schools have police officers.  Did you actually call the high school and ask?  I haven't checked, but I would bet that all LA high schools have policemen assigned to their campuses and all the high schools in the SF Bay Area too.  Notice I said armed policemen - not armed gurard.


----------



## geekette (Oct 21, 2009)

I don't believe there are armed guards at metro Indy schools, but we had Charlie the Cop when I was in high school.  Plain clothes, I think he was mostly on the lookout for drugs and he was a great guy, joking with us and such.  He was "cool" but you knew he'd bust you if you went afoul because that was his job.  

we didn't have many problems with gangs, tho I did go to school with murderers.  It was just nice to not know it until they were arrested.


----------



## John Cummings (Oct 21, 2009)

DeniseM said:


> John - I don't think so.  In urban areas, I bet more schools have police officers assigned to high school campuses, than don't.  In our area, most high schools have police officers.  Did you actually call the high school and ask?  I haven't checked, but I would bet that all LA high schools have policemen assigned to their campuses and all the high schools in the SF Bay Area too.  Notice I said armed policemen - not armed gurard.



Like I said, Modesto has a very high crime rate and a serious gang problem compared to most cities. Yes, I checked and there are no armed police in the schools here in the Temecula Valley which has a metro population of approximately 300,000. We didn't have any in the Poway School District either in metro San Diego.

I am sure that a lot of LA High Schools and San Bernardino and many others do have armed police in their schools.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 21, 2009)

Our suburb sounds similar to pj's - well-off with high test scores, an honors program, many AP courses and a high college acceptance/scholarship rate, and a wide mix of kids.  We have an in-house armed police officer in the high school and the two middle schools; the elementary schools have private security.  A police officer is at the high and middle schools every hour the building is open - during school hours, all afternoon for extra-curricular activities, and evenings for the community school sessions.  In addition, a police cruiser with two officers is parked at both high school entrances for about forty minutes every morning and afternoon, and during every athletic event.  There is only one entry door accessible at all hours with a security booth just inside that entrance; two private security officers there sign in/out every visitor and watch the monitors that show all the camera views from around and in the building.

This isn't a violent town, we don't have gang activity.  But all of these safety precautions came about for the same reasons that our zero tolerance policy was enacted.  I know it's ridiculous to say that Columbine WILL happen at every school, but it's hard to deny that it CAN.  And that's the reason for the extreme security measures.

It's telling that when our school system was forced to make cuts in the security budget, parents were overwhelmingly in favor of keeping all of the above police presence but letting go of the DARE officers (who did drug/alcohol/sexual abuse education programs with the fifth graders.)  If you have children in the buildings, you want them to be as physically safe as possible even if it means that overkill might bite your kid some day.


----------



## ScoopKona (Oct 21, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> It's telling that when our school system was forced to make cuts in the security budget, parents were overwhelmingly in favor of keeping all of the above police presence but letting go of the DARE officers (who did drug/alcohol/sexual abuse education programs with the fifth graders.)



Then I applaud the parents in your community. DARE was never any help. (It has a success rate equal to "doing nothing at all.") DW the teacher hates DARE -- most parents in this area have NOT talked to their kids about drugs by 5th grade, and some kids immediately seek dope after the program is over. Moral: You can't send a cop to do the parents' job.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,99564,00.html


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 21, 2009)

ScoopLV said:


> Then I applaud the parents in your community. DARE was never any help. (It has a success rate equal to "doing nothing at all.") DW the teacher hates DARE -- most parents in this area have NOT talked to their kids about drugs by 5th grade, and some kids immediately seek dope after the program is over. Moral: You can't send a cop to do the parents' job.
> 
> http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,99564,00.html



Oh boy, during my Eileen's fifth grade year I was terrified of her DARE officer!  Every week she came home and told me that she "left another note in the box for Officer Bob to read," but she refused to tell me what was in her note.  "That's private, Mom, we don't have to tell ANYONE what we want to talk about with him."

I couldn't imagine what she needed a police officer's help with and none of the leading questions that the so-called experts say we're supposed to ask our kids got me any answers.  Neither did calling him - he would only tell me that it was a safe way for kids to communicate their fears to him, and if he needed to be in touch with me he would be.  As far as I knew, that DARE officer could be busting down my door any time and I didn't even know what kind of lawyer to line up just in case!

Three years later after I'd given up smoking, she finally told me that she had been asking Officer Bob to help her figure out what she could do to get me to quit.  Now there are a million reasons to quit smoking, but not having to worry about the town's DARE officer carting me off to the Big House was never at the top of my list.  :rofl:


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Oct 21, 2009)

Rick and I were in high school Army ROTC.  We shot rifles in the range twice a week.  The range was in the basement of North Denver High School.  We went to competitions, and had sharp shooter ribbons for our uniforms, which we wore every Monday.  

I believe the ROTC kids at North still shoot rifles and the range is still there.  Army Colonels and Sergeants teach the ROTC course.


----------



## pjrose (Oct 21, 2009)

SueDonJ said:


> Three years later after I'd given up smoking, she finally told me that she had been asking Officer Bob to help her figure out what she could do to get me to quit.  Now there are a million reasons to quit smoking, but not having to worry about the town's DARE officer carting me off to the Big House was never at the top of my list.  :rofl:



:hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: 

And congratulations for giving up smoking!


----------



## Rose Pink (Oct 22, 2009)

*Back to the original post ...*

Has anyone heard any updates? Was this a case of the school administration overreacting or was there something else about this kid that was troubling?  

Does the principal have it in for Boy Scouts or was this kid threatening to kidnap a girl who had snubbed him, forcing her to live in the woods with him and his survival gear, until she could see the error of her ways?  So many creative ways to spin this story without knowing any real facts.

Any one have any real facts and updates?


----------



## John Cummings (Oct 22, 2009)

*Denise, you were right.*



DeniseM said:


> John - I don't think so.  In urban areas, I bet more schools have police officers assigned to high school campuses, than don't.  In our area, most high schools have police officers.  Did you actually call the high school and ask?  I haven't checked, but I would bet that all LA high schools have policemen assigned to their campuses and all the high schools in the SF Bay Area too.  Notice I said armed policemen - not armed gurard.



Denise,

I have to apologize to you. I was basing my post on what I read from the Murrieta School District's web site. Their only mention of police and the school was that they had police assigned outside on the streets by the school when the kids arrived at school and when they left. The rest of the commentary on police was the enforcement of the truancy laws that are strictly enforced.

I decided to call the manager of school security for the school district. He just called me back a few minutes ago. Yes, we do have armed police officers in the schools. They have an office in the schools and are assigned there. I then asked him if that was really necessary here where we don't have gang problems and a very low crime rate. He said that has nothing to do with it but it is a nationwide policy.

You learn something new everyday.


----------

