Just say no to zero tolerance.

No that is silly this link is downright crazy

http://www.news.com.au/weird-true-freaky/toy-guns-will-have-to-be-licensed-in-queensland-under-new-firearms-laws/story-e6frflri-1225900910503

When a policy doesn't make sense for it's declared purpose, you have to ask what purpose it does make sense for. In the case of zero tolerance in schools, it's to avoid claims of discrimination. Certain groups are disproportionately represented among offenders. Using a blind and automatic policy mechanism allows the school to deal with these kids w/o incurring liability for discrimination, disparate impact, and the rest. Unfortunately this approach also catches a lot of kids who would have been let off w/ detention under the old discriminatory policy.

Zero tolerance is complete crap. My FIVE-year-old (now seven, and not expelled, thank goodness) got caught up in a couple of really rich cases-- once because he inappropriately touched another five-year-old (hell-oooo, they're FIVE!) and once because he hit a teacher (it was a flaily slap on the back to get the guy's attention. Suspension for hitting? REALLY???) At age five, my son had no clue why he was being punished! All you can do at that age is keep repeating, "no hitting, no touching" until it sinks in! Did I mention he's autistic and his allegedly-knowledgeable teacher punished him as if he were a neurotypical kid much older than five?

We are SO FORTUNATE that the principal of that school has some sense, and she has since changed the guidelines for teacher reporting of "incidents" categorized under the county's zero-tolerance rules.

It's funny Amy is talking about idiots running schools today. This has nothing to do with guns, but I have to tell about what I saw on Bill Oreilly last night. I don't always agree with Bill, but this story floored me. There is a school in Massechusetts that took a middle school class on some kind of religion tour, I guess, and over the course of a few days visited a synagogue, and a couple other worship establishments of different denominations, concluding with a visit to a mosque. At no other establishment did these kids participate in any religious ceremonies, except the mosque. Upon being asked, the boys participated in afternoon prayer with the muslims that were there. Only the boys, and from what Bill said, it was the wealthy ones. I don't know how they determined financial stauts at a glance, but that's beside the point. Why can kids go pray on a field trip, but not say grace when they open their lunch bag in the cafeteria at school? Isn't a constitutional violation anyway to take kids to church during school? I know Amy's not religious, and I'm not a devotee of any religion by far, but the simple concept of this had me a little angry last night.

Wait. Your FIVE-year-old "inappropriately" touched another kid? My first thought: Of course he did, that's what 5-year-olds do! Regarding the teacher: Correct response - teacher tells boy "That's not how people treat each other."

Morons!

It's all about avoiding liability lawsuits

Anita and David are exactly right. ZT is the crap a school district's lawyers whisper in the school board's ears.

Defending a school district from discrimination suits is possible without going to ZT's mindless lengths. But -- doing so would take some effort -- written documentation, when real punishable events occur, that could hold up in court . Much like what is required in the workplace to sustain termination of an employee and, say, a successful denial of unemployment benefits for cause.

My guess is that the lawyers feel that teachers and administrators, who after all are government employees, are too lazy or otherwise disinclined to do the work necessary to maintain a reasonable disciplinary policy and successfully defend it against legal attack. Thus their advocacy of this moronic "one size fits all" ZT approach.

If the kid brought a realistic gun to school, I could understand a serious punishment, but even then expelling for 2 years is insane.

And about the mosque thing, I'm beginning to think that certain groups of people who say they don't want religion in schools just mean Judeo-Christian religion; everything else is fine with them. I haven't figured out if this is some kind of vengance against someone religious who somehow offended them years ago, if this is something that gets taught, or if they just want to offend as many non-violent people as possible.

Why can kids go pray on a field trip, but not say grace when they open their lunch bag in the cafeteria at school?

Jessica
____________________________

How do you KNOW they can't?

The cartoonist Herblock (1909-2001) wrote (not verbatim), in his 1985 book, "Herblock Through the Looking Glass" that he went to public schools in Chicago and "if the teacher had tried to lead a class in prayer, parents would have wanted to know why she wasn't teaching whatever she was supposed to be teaching. But nobody ever told us we couldn't pray. We knew we could do it at any time - even when we were simply praying we wouldn't get called on before the bell rang."

I was simply trying to mske the point that kids can't openly pray in school, at least not here. If my child was to bow his head in prayer in thanks for his meal in the lunchroom, he would be in trouble for it because it might offend the atheist, or the buddhist, or the muslim just down the way. I just wonder if someone of a different religion was to be required to pray at a certain time every day, if it would be allowed. I'm assuming in this country nowadays that it would. It is upsetting to me because it seems like everyone is held to different standards depending on where you come from and what you believe.

Yep Amy! Kids do inappropriately touch. Hell I have been molested (technically) from about 20 different Korean children. Know before you think me some Chestor the molester. Here in Korea we have DongChim http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kancho. I have been teaching some kids and BAM some kids fingers are up my butt crack, You know what happens! Half the time I whirl around and instinctively attack usually just a back hand AND rarely at that connect (kids are too bloody short). The other half I scream!

Know the question is what is the best response to this. Kick the kid out of school, call the police, have psychologists/therpists borught in, have parent teacher meetings. Nope! We do what we been doing for thousands of year all the way back to when we were monkeys and some little baby monkey bit our ass. We smack the kid, yell bloody murder, threaten hell and damnation onto the kid, and put the fear of a lifetime in the now cowering child. You know what it works! Most kids learn that doing that gets them into trouble and they do not want to risk angering John!

Another feeling case was when I was a kid and in my elementary school some (younger) kid kept going around and grabbing other kids balls. In the end I think what happened is he got a talking too from some adults and it stopped. Also I think it was just a phase. I would hate to see what would have happened if a zero tolerance had been done that kids life would have been ruined for years.

Consider this what would happen if every time a boy pulls a girl ponytail and the boy had to be kicked of school.

My husband is a teacher in the Broward County school system, at a poor urban polulation middle school. He loves his job, but hates the current administration. The current administration treats all the teachers like they are infantile morons who are nothing more than glorified babysitters, and yet blames them all when the kids don't do well on the (stupid) standardized tests they take every year. And this one size fits all no tolerance policy... yep... they got it.
What's worse, the kids who usually gets suspended or expelled are not the ones that are intending violence. It's so damn inconsistant it's disgusting. My friend is also a teacher in another Broward County school and shared these gems with me.

A kid once brought their pocket knife by accident. He had used his backpack that weekend to go on a fishing trip with his dad (yeah this one actually had a dad in his life!) and forgot to take out the knife. When he realized it, he went straight to the teacher and owned up. He told the teacher that he forgot to take it out and wanted to turn the knife in so that he didn't get in trouble, hoping that he would see that it was an honest mistake and the teacher would just confiscate it until the end of the day and let it go. Nope. EXPELLED! He had to repeat his entire 8th grade year. Now I can see where a pocket knife can be considered dangerous and the fact that it wasn't a toy made it a little more difficult, but hey, the kid made a mistake and tried to do the right thing. Detention, or a brief suspension would have been more appropriate, considering the circumstances. He was actually one of the few honors students, so now his great school record is tarnished, because of a mistake. If he hadn't turned himself in, no one would have been the wiser but because he thought he was doing the right thing, he got punished.

Then, there is the kid who literally beat the pulp out of another kid on school grounds.. He jumped him after class. He bashed his head into the side of the brick building, kicked him on the ground (wearing Timbalands and anyone who knows those boots know that they fucking hurt), and almost suffocated him by sitting on his head and while punching him in the ribs. The kid who got jumped spent two weeks in the hospital. The kid who jumped him? You would think that would be an immediate explulsion right? "Zero Tolerance" should clearly apply here? Nope. He got three days in ISS and he was back at school the next week. I don't know if the parents prssed charges but I know that the school did nothing about it.

So I guess "Zero violence" policy only applies when a "weapon" is involved. It's totally okay to be violent with your bare hands though.