Lots Of Tolerance For Absurdity
Zero tolerance in a Rhode Island school district for the tiny plastic guns carried by tiny plastic soldiers on the hat a little boy made for his school's "hat day." (Make that "asshat day" when nonthinking school-o-crats are involved).
That decision has now been reversed by the school superintendent, reports the AP (photo at the link):
David Morales, an 8-year-old student at Tiogue School, made the hat after choosing a patriotic theme for a school project last week. He glued plastic Army figures to a camouflage baseball cap. But school officials banned the hat, saying the guns carried by the Army figures violated school policy.The decision prompted criticism of the school and support for David. On Friday, the boy received a medal from Lt. Gen. Reginald Centracchio, the retired head of the Rhode Island National Guard. Gen. Centracchio said David should be thanked for recognizing veterans and soldiers.
"You did nothing wrong, and you did an outstanding job," Gen. Centracchio told the boy.
I don't know, anyone who's seen Toy Story can tell you those little army men are pretty spry.
What was the cited reason behind banning the hat? Because it's worrisome that these zero tolerance policies are getting into imitations of guns. The teensy, molded plastic gun obviously doesn't fire teensy, molded plastic bullets, so the reasoning must be that it's bad to even represent a gun. So, in that case, the school should outlaw carrot sticks, rulers, and, of course, fingers.
NumberSix at June 21, 2010 12:00 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/06/21/loads_of_tolera.html#comment-1725262">comment from NumberSixHah - fingers, especially. And the word "bang!" (as in "bang-bang, you're dead, brush your teeth and go to bed!")
Amy Alkon at June 21, 2010 12:02 AM
In third grade, I had a part in our public school Christmas (*GASP!*) program. I was one of Santa's elves. Through very lame rhyme, I explained that I was the elf responsible for making toy guns (double *GASP!*), which were in great demand. That'd get somebody arrested nowadays, I'll bet.
Support your American public school system: Drug-free, gun-free, thought-free!
old rpm daddy at June 21, 2010 4:52 AM
I was at a party where there were some toys out for the kids. Most of the kids were girls, and there were lots of toys for pretending house (i.e., tiny fake appliances, plastic utensils, etc.) One little boy shoved the small plastic spoons and forks into the small fake toaster and fired them like bullets, shouting, "I'm an evil genius! Mwahahahaha." Best. Thing. Ever.
Keeping kids, especially boys, from turning ANYTHING into a projectile is a losing battle. And a silly one.
MonicaP at June 21, 2010 6:56 AM
I am so not surprised by this. Until recently, camouflage prints were banned from our local public schools until the uproar because many kids were wearing them in tribute to their parent's who were fighting for our country.
The school also contacted me because my son wrote stories that involved some sort of battle. By the way, my son is a well adjusted, non-violent young man now.
I think that the world is a scary place for little kids. It makes them feel safe to think that they could handle anything and take out the "bad guy."
Jen at June 21, 2010 7:13 AM
http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/2010/06/16/outrage-of-the-week-14-y-o-arrested-for-abduction-of-toddler-he-helped/
Outrage of the Week: 14 y.o. Arrested for “Abduction” Of Toddler He Helped
Posted on June 16, 2010 by lskenazy
Readers — Once again, I’m just at a loss for words. Here’s the story of a 14-year-old boy named Edwin who was shopping with his mom at a Burlington Coat Factory in Florida. When he saw a 3-year-old girl looking lost he took her around to try to find her mom. His own mom saw him go looking and said she would try to help, too.
Then Edwin saw a group of women leaving the store and thought the girl’s mom might be among them. So he went out of the store and finally took the little girl’s hand. When he realized the mom wasn’t among this group, he returned to the store. He met up with his mom and the girl’s mom. He handed the little girl over and proceeded to shop for shoes with his own mom.
And then he was arrested for “attempted abduction.” The press arrived as he was lead out of the store in handcuffs. This wonderful column by Mike Thomas in the Orlando Sentinel says it best:
Edwin is quite the kidnapper. He brings his mom along. He hangs out in front of the store until the victim’s mother shows up. And then he returns to the store and starts shopping for shoes.
That’s one cool customer.
Detectives arrived and investigated. They then slapped the cuffs on Edwin and paraded him out in front of television cameras by now waiting outside.
“We tried to be sensitive to the fact he was 14,” said Orange County sheriff’s spokesman Jeff Williamson. “We made an effort to keep direct questions out of his face.”
Hardly. Two reporters shoved microphones in Edwin’s face without any objection from the detectives escorting him. One of the investigators probably could have bitten one of the reporters on the arm.
“Can you tell us why you’re in handcuffs?” a reporter shouted out. “Did you try to kidnap someone?”
Despite his young age, one television station identified Edwin and put the video of his arrest on its website…. But look at the evidence.
We have the little girl’s mother losing track of her daughter.
We have Edwin’s mother not taking the girl from Edwin and turning her over to a store employee.
And we have Edwin in handcuffs.
I’m not sure the problem here is with the 14-year-old.
Interestingly enough, the girl’s mother never did press charges. But the Sheriff’s Office decided it would, ultimately settling on a charge of false imprisonment.
“He was in custody of the child and had no authority to be so,” said Capt. Angelo Nieves. “The thing is to make clear we have not charged him with an offense that did not occur.”
Congratulations.
Let’s recall, meantime, what happens when it becomes the norm to suspect any Good Samaritan, of any age, under any circumstances, of the most disgusting of motives. Recall the story of the man in England who also saw a lost toddler, this one on the side of the road he was driving by. He thought of stopping the car, scooping her up and driving her around till he could find where she’d wandered off from. But then he thought, “What will it look like if I’ve got a little girl who’s not mine in my car?” He knew exactly what it would look like. So he didn’t pick her up.
And then she drowned.
I hate that story (but can’t find it on Google — can you, readers? Please provide a link!) And I hate the one above it. When we react to our fellow human beings with the very worst, most vile assumptions first, we are less and less apt to reach out and help each other. That’s not a safer world. It’s the opposite. — Lenore
P.S. A reader named Fred did find a link to the English tragedy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/coventry_warwickshire/4837614.stm
Sabba Hillel at June 21, 2010 7:17 AM
>>So, in that case, the school should outlaw carrot sticks, rulers, and, of course, fingers.
Kids do get severely punished in some schools for pointing their fingers and saying, "Bang." It has been on Internet news a lot.
###
Good explanation, Jen at June 21, 2010 7:13 AM
irlandes at June 21, 2010 7:29 AM
I like the "school-o-crats" term. Seems at least once every few months we have some pompous principal making some dunderheaded decision that makes us all wonder what planet he or she came from. Zero-tolerance policies fail by their very nature because, outside of mathematics, there is no such thing as an absolute. (And did I just violate my own statement? Humm....)
Steve at June 21, 2010 7:53 AM
Re: Outrage of the Week
Oh my God. Just when I think things can't get any more ridiculous.
It's bad enough that an entire generation or two has gone wild because it's no longer acceptable for adults to correct any misbehaving child who comes across his or her path, mommy is too tired from working to discipline her child and daddy's out of the picture.
Now, adults can't even help a child in need for fear of being accused of the most disgusting of crimes. Even if Edwin is found not guilty or the charges are dropped entirely, a public accusation of malfeasance involving a small child isn't something one is able to shrug off. This may well destroy the young man's life. I don't think I'm being overly dramatic.
My husband and I love kids, thought we don't have any of our own. When we see cute kids looking at us, as little kids will do, we'll say hello, smile and give a little wave. The parents' response used to be to smile back or tell the child "Say 'hi', Susie!" I'm noticing more frequently that the reaction is suspicion and to turn the child away from us.
I've mentioned to my husband that he should be sure and never look at, wave to, or, God forbid, speak to a child when he's out by himself. Even if he's sitting in a booth at a restaurant and the kid is sitting right next to his mother, craning her neck over the booth to stare at him and making doe-eyes.
Beth at June 21, 2010 8:11 AM
"(Make that "asshat day" when nonthinking school-o-crats are involved)."
they are just beingh fiscally responsble. They have to prevent stupid lawsuits form stupid parents over this kind of thing, or media crucifiction when some little piece of shit brings real guns to school to haoses it down. "Why weren't you over-reacting all along; you could have prevent ed this but didn't!!!"
That answer is to turn on the shithead parents who sue the schools at the drop of a hat.
Jim at June 21, 2010 8:14 AM
I love how they spend (waste) our tax dollars on this type of idiotic stuff.
David M. at June 21, 2010 8:23 AM
The best part of zero tolerance is that the 16 yo with the 45 Auto under his jacket won't really be affected by this. He's learned to hid his gun.
vlad at June 21, 2010 9:01 AM
Didn't get much coverage, but the school superintendent did issue a statement saying he wanted to work to change the policy.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127907052
"Ken Di Pietro said in an e-mail to The Associated Press that the no-weapons policy shouldn't limit student expression, especially when students are depicting 'tools of a profession or service," such as the military or police.
'The event exposed how a policy meant to ensure safe environments for students can become restrictive and can present an image counter to the work of our schools to promote patriotism and democracy,' Di Pietro said."
It's a nicely worded statement and Sadly, I'm sure someone somewhere will be offended by any attempted change.
Nanc in Ashland at June 21, 2010 10:45 AM
I said something the other day that really angered some of you, and do not at all repent.
A little girl at the bottom of the long hill here in my Third World Mexican village, adopted me as a grandpa when she was a baby, though I didn't know it until she was big enough to walk across the street, hug me somewhere around my knees, and say, "Grandpa!"
When she was 10, she was taking a very poor class in English, which is mandatory here. I went down once a week to help her with her homework.
One day, when I entered the house, her mom wasn't there, and I asked where her mom was. She told me her mom would be back soon. After a moment's hesitation, I suggested we sit on the bench under the tree in the back yard, which is where we usually sit. When her mom came back, she didn't even blink, gave me a big smile, and told me hello, and we went back to our English, and mom went about her chores.
There is not enough money in the world to pay me to go into a house and help a ten year old girl with her homework while her mom is not home, in the US, even if she does think of me as her grandpa, which also would probably never happen in the US.
She is 12 now, and this year once again has English class. I will go down around 4 pm, and if she is there, we will have fun with English.
She is very affectionate, and when I come and when I go, I give her a loud smack kiss on her forehead while holding her head with both hands, and she gives me a hard hug, and an affectionate kiss on the cheek. I told her and her mom a while back I was going to miss that sugar when she gets older. She said, "I will never change." Well, we'll see.
I went to visit a couple nieces a few weeks ago. I also give them the forehead kiss. There was the cutest, chubby little neighbor girl visiting them, and after I gave my nieces, their customary forehead kiss, she looked disappointed. I asked her if she wanted one, too, and she nodded yes, so I did. And, she looked happy about it.
This is like a different universe.
irlandes at June 21, 2010 10:46 AM
I noticed the other day that you can't even buy toy guns anymore in most toy stores. I needed to buy a cap gun for a show I am doing, and I had to specially order it online because Toys R Us and multiple other toy retailers won't sell them. At least not here. I had to fucking special order a PLASTIC TOY GUN!
I am terrified for when my future children actually go to school. My friends son got sent home for having green hair. The priniciples excuse was that "his hair was distracting and it was attention seeking. That sort of thing tends to attract bullies and we don't want our kids becoming victims of bullies." The reality is, this kid is a very "green hair" type of kid. And all the kids in his class loved it. Even the teacher thought it was very "him." But, the principal wanted to "take a premptive strike against him making himself a target". Riiiiight so we apparently have to teach our kids that they shouldn't express themselves or be an individual because someone might pick on them? Ridiculous.
Did you know that most elementary schools also ban peanut butter and jelly from kids lunchboxes down here? Apparently, the schools are so afraid of being sued by a parent whose kids are allergic to peanuts, that my kid won't even be allowed to bring his own for his own lunch. I get not having them in the school prep area in the cafeteria, but in my kids lunchbox? What are they afraid will happen? The sandwhich might jump off the table at lunch and attack the allergic kid?
Sabrina at June 21, 2010 12:50 PM
The sandwhich might jump off the table at lunch and attack the allergic kid?
Actually as stupid as it sound there are some merits to this. I really though it was stupid at first but some kids have such sever peanut allergies that touching them after eating peanuts can and will trigger full on anaphalactic (sp) shock. I can see the argument for putting a child that allergic in a special program but so longs as he/she is in the school there is logic behind the rule.
vlad at June 21, 2010 1:20 PM
I have to disagree vlad. A kid that allergic should be in a special program, damn straight, but keeping hundreds of kids away from peanuts or peanut butter because of a hypothetical severe allergy, that is thoroughly impractical. Kids get snacks all over the place, they get peanutty substances on their hands and touch each other and smear stuff, kids are a mess, its what they do until we civilize them. What you're suggesting creates very little real security, and a very great deal of false feelings of security.
Robert at June 21, 2010 1:39 PM
PLus some parents in an attempt to let little johnnie "feel" normal they dont inform him of his allergies
lujlp at June 21, 2010 1:55 PM
Oh I'm not suggesting that it's a good idea, far from it. It's the reality of why they have peanut free schools. One is a private Jewish school in Brooklyn NY. They are not subject to the rampant stupidity as much as public schools. So it's not just government bureaucracies but private institutions as well.
These rules are put in effect typically when there is a child at the school with that severe of an allergy, not hypothetically. Special programs cost a #@%& load, made my head spin when I found out that a peanut free out placements START at 80K per year. So it's really a cost cutting measure, and becomes more effective as more kids show up with peanut allergies. Also parents can legally insist that their child not be out placed. This is stupid that child needs special care. But do we give the school free reign to out place, or do we allow dick head parents to use the same rules that rational parents use?
vlad at June 21, 2010 1:59 PM
START at 80K per year
As a reference the typical yearly education of a non special needs child is 5k.
Also as criminally stupid as what lujlp suggests, parents do exactly that for that reason.
vlad at June 21, 2010 2:03 PM
Once again the west is turning into a stuck up mess. Love teaching here in Korea. I can rough house with the boys, Swat (lightly) the bad kids, and if a little girl, boy too if so inclined give a hug. Thru there has been some freaks outs lately. I do see the encroaching bans and changes in the next 10 years.
As to having to specially order cap gun at Toys R Us. Oh my God. Love Korea again, I can go into any toy store and buy a airsoft BB gun from handgun to shotgun to submachine gun. I get the odd kid that brings a BB gun to school. I usually tell the kid to put it in his bag (unless I am playing with it). Fireworks are available at the stationary store.
Starting to believe the Korean racism that they are superior. In all my years here I have never met a kid with peanut allergy or had any other teacher comment on allergy (and I have asked). I think it is so rare that the kids that had it likely been killed off already.
John Paulson at June 21, 2010 6:44 PM
If a kid has peanut allergies -- they need to know how to use an epipen and the teachers should have one in her desk drawer. That solves that.
------------------------
Average per child comparative costs in K-12 districts rose to $13,601 during the 2008-09 school year, compared to $12,598 the prior year, and $11,939 in 2006-07.
Ref: www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/nj_school_report_card_annual.html
------------------------
And I can't find the article or Amy's blog, but I could swear this same crap happened about 2 years back and the school didn't back down.
Jim P. at June 21, 2010 7:02 PM
Leave a comment