It’s a Fork, It’s a Spoon, It’s a ... Weapon?

Source: NY Times


 



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/education/12discipline.html?no_interstitial

---

This is taking political correctness too far.

When I was in grade school in the 60s, ALL the boys had pocket knives and we all brought them to school. The intent was just as a tool. If anyone used it as a weapon, that'd be another story altogether.

NT

and zero need for these idiots who enforce the policy, let's replace them with a calculator.

They can hire administrators that can't think. Those C- and D students are a lot less burden on the payroll.

"Still, some school administrators argue that it is difficult to distinguish innocent pranks and mistakes from more serious threats..."

And they would be wrong. Especially here.


"...and that the policies must be strict to protect students."

BS alert! It's not the policy's job to protect students, it's YOUR job as an administrator or teacher. The policy is just a tool, not a universal law of nature.
What this really should say is, "the policies must be strict enough to protect the district and its employees from litigation."

Gag me with a spork!

Aside from making themselves laughingstocks- the psychology points to deeper seated fears.

Not individually- nor collectively as a people.

If it wasn't for those cowardly Americans.

Or Carol O'Connor?

I haven't watched that in years. I always got a kick that The Jeffersons were a spin-off. Thanks, Meathead.

You know, that Battle of Britain thingy... while Americans sat on the sidelines.

And hardly depictive of the entire war. You can thank Joe Kennedy for the view that the Brits wouldn't survive the Luftwaffe attacks.

Rather than being so arrogantly ethnocentric. Barborrosa made certain Britain would survive- much more so than American intervention.

that if the Germans succeeded with their nuclear research before the Americans, Europe would be a much different place. You just can't stand that though, can you?

What kind of a comeback is that????

:rofl:

Check out Uranmaschine sometime.

:eyes:

bunch of cowards, surely. And that with no army, or air force to speak of and for a country like Poland. What a bunch of cowards. Meanwhile, America was declaring itself impartial and isolationist. Brave Americans. Not to mention that it was more than 60 years ago...but then again, America hasn't done much for the rest of the world in the last 60 years except develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, export worthless cultural entertainments and interfere with the growth of democracies worldwide.
Gosh, what a brave and indispensable nation you are.:+

The horror, the horror....

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Germany could have never built its massive war machine without help from U.S. corporations like Eastman Kodak, DuPont, Standard Oil, Ford Motor Company and many more. Those same corporations then built the massive war machine that defeated the German war machine, making vast fortunes in the process. How handy is that?

Man, those American corporations sure are 'brave'.

Britain couldn't have defeated Germany alone. Thanks for playing.

Yeah, WWII was a corporate scam. :eyes: We never should have fought those nice Germans. Ugh, zinn-thought.

The war in Europe went east- and that's where it was decided. The tipping point was Stalingrad.

That's of course not to denigrate the American contribution- just pointing out that the Soviets suffered massive casualties and ate up German resources to a degree that the war would have ultimately been lost even if Pearl Harbor never happened.

We kept the Soviets standing as well. Before they moved their industry east beyond the Urals the US kept the USSR alive through our lend-lease programs. Without our help they couldn't have applied the their "total war" philosophy. And throughout the war Stalin screamed at the allies to open up a Western front. Because of the massive casualties that the often pointless offensives Stalin demanded. I agree they probably would have still won the war, in 1948 or 1950. If they could matain that level of offensive operations. Our fronts in France and Italy eased the pressure on the Russians and vica versa.

Britain would have had to throw in the towel because of U-Boat warfare and the Russians would have stood alone. And that might have broken them.

superpower.

than that. Or at least better typing. :)

But thanks for playing... :eyes:

And I'm talking about insane zero tolerance rules and running around afraid of their own shadows, stockpiling ammunition and building the largest and most expensive prison system, where they incarcerate people for life for stealing a slice of pizza.

Then of course, there's the contrast in how the two countries responded to terror attacks. Whereas Americans ran around looking for terrosits under their beds for years- destroying their free society, London Mayor Ken Livingston's response was this:

Finally, I wish to speak directly to those who came to London today to take life.



more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2005/07/08/livingstone_speech_feature.shtml

health, theoretically forever, cuz it only takes money. Now food, we've been trained to eat swill.

My kid's school has quasi-uniforms, a complete ban on weapons.

They're not allowed to take in pencils. One kid was in trouble because he actually took in an unapproved pencil. Seems that it might provoke jealousy or be a disruption. Everybody must be the same, and not only did they have to send in supplies on day 1, but it turns out that those are the *only* supplies they're allowed to have.

If out sick, they're not allowed back until one day after their fever drops below 100 F. Ok, that's sane. The principal has discretion to require documentation. It's been decided for our kid's school they have to have a written excuse from a doctor stating the days they were sick and the health reason for any absence greater than 3 days--as though the doctor would know if you took him in on day 3. Or on day 4, after he's pretty much better but you realized that you need the doctor's note. He could go back, but the absence would be unexcused. Every day our kid's been out sick with what is probably the flu we've gotten a call from the school letting us know that he was absent and wanting us to call to confirm that we know he was absent.

17 unexcused absences and the principal has the discretion of recommending that the kid be advanced to the next grade. Actual test scores, grades, etc.--who cares.

He's not allowed to share his lunch at school. The teacher can take in mass-produced healthy treats for the class, with permission, but nothing homemade. Same for anything that parents send in.

The school has a policy against bully, teasing, gang behavior, wearing 'gansta' clothing, smoking and drinking, drug use, illicit sexual activities, selling stolen property, and hit lists.

We get a daily report on him. We have to sign it and send it back every school day.

Did I mention our kid's 5 and he's in kindergarten?

Part of it is fear by the school board that something horrible could happen. Part is fear by the parents. And a heck of a lot of it is fear of lawyers. Take the doctor's note/absence policy. It's there because some parents will protect little Johnny when he's truant--the principal can request documentation. To abnegate her discretion and always require it is silly and counterproductive. But if she exercises her discretion the parents can sue, and then she has to take time to defend how she used her discretion. If it's a foolish blanket policy, there's almost certainly no suit. Many prefer mass oppression to isolated incidents of possible oppression, the old "I'd rather your cow dies if I don't have a cow" kind of thinking that never made anybody or any nation great.

And I never did get how anyone could think that Leslie Howard was masculine or sexy.

They are just very highly regulated (as they should be).As for knives, there is nothing to stop you buying kitchen knives unless you're under 16. What else could you possibly want a knife for? Note that deer hunting does not really exist in the UK.


THe UK has its share of silly laws but I've never heard of anybody being sent a notice that they had to mow their lawn because the grass was too high. I've never heard of anyobe being given a ticket for going 4 miles over the speed limit. IT's perfecty legal to keep chickens within city limits, and you should see the fireworks that go off around bonfire night. You would be truly amazed. So each locality has its silly laws, but speaking as an American, I can say that's its only Americans who spout off about having the most freedom in the world without ever having travelled anywhere else to find out if it was true.

I guess the citizen that wants to live has no voice.

Uh...they like brains over brawn? Maybe?

The funny thing is, Ashley in Gone With the Wind should, IMHO, look like the Brawny paper towel guy. He SHOULD be a hunkl....but a 19th century hunk.... Like JEB Stuart ( a real lady's man at the time)



or General Pender (many contemporary descriptions by men and women of how handsome he was).

People were weird back then. Upper class women walked around looking deathly pale and staying out of the sun to stay that way. Upper body muscles in men might be viewed as lower class, as even today we recognize that our masculinity meter is based in a rather blue collar aesthetic.

Is your hatred of the US that deep and illogical?

Then why didn't we stay a British colony?

Then why did the Brits need us to save them in WWI and WWII?

Then why did we have to protect them from the Soviets for half a century?

Then why are they banning knives? What's next? Running in the halls and harsh language?



You are one of DU's most recognized one-trick ponies.

I think it's pretty clear which is the closest to a police state and which population is most terrified of scary people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration#Incarceration_rates_by_country

The United States' incarceration rate is, according to official reports, the highest in the world, at 737 persons imprisoned per 100,000 (as of 2005)

In 2006 the incarceration rate in England and Wales is 139 persons imprisoned per 100,000 residents

Yeah, I know which one is closer to a police state. :eyes:

Fix the drug laws and we won't have such high incarceration rates. Other then that, most of those "scary people" belong in prison.

considering that your focus is almost always on:

1. Outrage over crime and calls for the harshest retribution;

2. firearms obsession and the fear (i.e. cowardice) that drives it;

and- as here- with ignorant, ethnocentric America rules no matter what sorts posts.

I suppose that come with your region of the country- but none of these are enviable qualities, to say the least.

Sorry to inject facts into your America hatefest.

deflect from our stupidity. Why try to point fingers when we need to clean our own house first?

I was an oboist in high school. The oboe- and, in the same family, the bassoon- are double reed instruments. Two precisely-shaped, thin pieces of cane are tightly bound together on a metal tube with string. When air is passed between the reeds, they vibrate against each other and sound is produced.

All serious oboists make their own reeds from scratch. This involves soaking and binding the cane, but most importantly, it also involves shaping the cane. The only way to do this is with what amounts to a very sharp straight razor that's been sharpened in a particular way. This razor is part of every oboe reed kit in the world. Is it absolutely necessary to the serious student and professional oboist, without any exception, period.

So, in spite of being a member of the National Honor Society and carrying a 3.85 GPA, and being awarded multiple accolades for my musicianship, I would have been expelled for repeatedly violating a zero-tolerance policy regarding weapons in school because I insisted upon having a knife on my music stand during class.

Zero-tolerance means zero-thought. We must bring an end to these policies, or at least somehow put a leash on their enforcement.

Oh. Good. Grief. My granny mind is officially boggled. Looking into Zachary's future I see a permanent criminal record, forget the possibility of scholarships and loans to help with college, no health insurance because of his pre-disposition to eat with the wrong utensils...these are just a few of the untoward consequences of his dastardly deed.

Okay, I've run out of words...

Way to bring a kid down! I think the school officials who made this idiotic call should find themselves unemployed. And yeah, if that were my kid/grandkid and I had any say about it, he/she could kiss public school goodbye! And I'd bill the school district for the private school costs.

This speaks more to the low quality of education offered in the Christina School District than it does the merits of their zero tolerance policy.

If the school offered an educational experience in which the administrator's had faith, they'd see the valuable teaching moment this situation offers and could use it to better young Zachary's life. As it is, with no belief in the pablum they peddle, they can only offer a reactionary response to a child's innocent transgression. Too bad. Education should be more than rote recitation, be it from the children or the adults.

They don't. Zero-tolerance policies are a wjay for decision-maker administrators to avoid using their own judgment, on the off chance they are wrong and someone gets hurt or killed. In such a case, they would be sued.

Zero-tolerance policies are a kneejerk reaction to that possibility. They don't dare have incorrect judgment. They think they quite literally cannot afford to think, in the most precise sense of the word "afford".

Hence the overreaction. Zero-tolerance policies require zero thought and zero judgment- precisely how public school administrators and insurance adjusters like it.

I do not agree with this mentality at all, but there it is. Only legislation can fix it.

:(

tines. You can really maim someone with an unprotected fork.

when the hinge opened up!! Death penalty now or nothing, baby!!!!













Surely I don't need a sarcasm tag here?

:shrug:

ELECTRIC sharpeners to make sure they're REALLY sharp! Hell, it's a FIFTH COLUMN!

I don't think I can wait for campus security now, I think I'll get Agent Mike on the job!

Agent Mike! Hey, wake up, buddy! Time's awasting! Get down to school and get those damned pencils and other weapons of math destruction!!!

but yes, the math teachers over in the 300's are fomenting murder!! Murder, I tell ya! Wait 'til I alert campus security in the morning!

:)

then fought by parents. Parents won. Teacher allowed it was why.

It's a very different story from bringing an eating utensil to school. I hate to think what would happen if a child brought chop sticks. You could poke an eye out with those things!

But they're still not allow them in schools. Unlike eating utensils.

It's almost as if North American schools don't have a monolithic policy on things.

Though, increasingly, eating utensils aren't allowed in schools. A few kids get expelled or arrested annually for plastic forks/butter knives.

... I'm really not sure if your comment was sarcasm or not:

> A few kids get expelled or arrested annually for plastic forks/butter knives.

:wtf:

Those aren't even the worst. Cake knives - essentially fancy spatulas? Buh-bye! Cartwheels? Someone could get hurt! We must punish the student! Scissors in a sewing class? Vile evil weapons! Two centimeter long GI Joe handguns? I shit you not, multiple students have gotten nailed for this!

And, to round the whole extravaganza of stupidity out, a typical source for the plastic butter knife incident.

Most PROGRESS in politics is pompous posturing on things like tough on crime. And we remove discretion from the professionals, and put it in the hands of mandatory minimums on everything. This ratcheting up of layer upon layer of redundant and superflous laws, is bogus, economically stupid. Removes even the intentions, such as removing any likelihood of plea bargains. MAking each and every con fight like hell. Zero Tolerance is for taliban and puritans. FUCK both of them.

She had one of those tiny swiss army knives on a keychain. They actually suspended her from school.

And my dad had a rifle class.

I grew up carrying a pocket knife.

We are in bizarro world, led by the Idiocracy, and there's no way out.

And they won't let us smoke The Weed to "escape reality."

Pay attention while we beat the liberal crap out of you!

Ugh.

I don't know how you teach youngsters to be responsible without giving them responsibilities.

I remember thinking what a big deal it was to be trusted with a device that could... inflict deadly harm, I guess. A fleeting thought that made me shudder... but it also made me very aware, and hence very careful.

I wonder if shop classes still exist... hammers and saws, you know. But then, pencils and pens can do serious damage.

What a world.

RCM = (red center mark) bullseye but we had to change that, because it upset some people that you would shoot a bull, especially in the eye.

Is now rife with the "Emo" crowd. It's cool to be low... doncha know.

We also had a class in high school where we learned to make dangerous metal objects go fast enough to kill someone, in activities that are a common cause of mortality!

I think knowledge and skill teach responsibility, and "zero tolerance" policies are counterproductive.

Tucker

The school administrators would rather blindly follow a rulebook than have to make actual decisions and use actual judgment.

muddies the waters. This is about making rules more important than reason. Rules must be Absolute!

People who believe in zero-tolerance are sick people who are intellectually lazy and lack empathy or sense.

Rules should serve a purpose. They should not BE the purpose in and of themselves.

School systems don't want to render judgments because that potentially makes them more liable if someone should file a lawsuit.

Who loses? The kids.

There was a well-publicized case here in VA of a kid (Benjamin Ratner) who took a knife away from a classmate because she had said she wanted to commit suicide. He put it in his locker with the intent of bringing it home and telling his mom (his goal was to protect and provide help for his classmate). He meant well but he should have gone directly to administrators. Another classmate informed teachers and the boy received a long-term suspension. The boy and his parents appealed and the case went to federal court and the boy lost.

The judge wrote:

"I write separately to express my compassion for Ratner, his family, and common sense. Each is the victim of good intentions run amuck. Ratner's complaint alleges that school suspensions for possession of a weapon on Loudoun County school property are imposed automatically, pursuant to a zero-tolerance policy that precludes consideration of the facts and circumstances of a particular student's conduct in determining a violation of stated policy and the resulting student punishment. There is no doubt that this zero-tolerance/automatic suspension policy, and others like it adopted by school officials throughout our nation, were adopted in large response to the tragic school shootings that have plagued our nation's schools over the past several years. Also, no doubt exists that in adopting these zerotolerance/automatic suspension policies, school officials had the noble intention of protecting the health and safety of our nation's school children and those adults charged with the profound responsibility of educating them. However, as the oft repeated old English maxim recognizes, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." The panic over school violence and the intent to stop it has caused school officials to jettison the common sense idea that a person's punishment should fit his crime in favor of a single harsh punishment, namely, mandatory school suspension. Such a policy has stripped away judgment and discretion on the part of those administering it; refuting the well established precept that judgment is the better part of wisdom."

For more:

http://md.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.%5CC04%5C2001%5C20010730_0001860.C04.htm/qx

Here's why, from the article linked in the OP:

"Education experts say that zero-tolerance policies initially allowed authorities more leeway in punishing students, but were applied in a discriminatory fashion. Many studies indicate that African-Americans were several times more likely to be suspended or expelled than other students for the same offenses.

“The result of those studies is that more school districts have removed discretion in applying the disciplinary policies to avoid criticism of being biased,” said Ronnie Casella, an associate professor of education at Central Connecticut State University who has written about school violence."


School districts used to take other factors into consideration when punishing students, but it led to charges of discrimination. If little Jimmy got detention for bringing a pocket knife to school, how could one justify suspending little Johnny for doing the same thing? A few lawsuits later by do-gooders who wanted everyone and everything to be equal and we ended up with policies that took away all discretion from principals for fear of being sued for being prejudiced/biased/discriminatory in the way in which they disciplined their students.

So they prove it was being applied in a racist manner, and you fault the people who want to stop the racism rather than the people practicing the racism?

Zero tolerance policies are ill advised. They only serve to shield the entity employing them from lawsuits. They do very little to promote justice, learning, or rehabilitation. I'm guessing you're a big fan of mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes and 3 Strikes laws as well?

Teachers and principals know their students, and the behavioral patterns of their students, well enough to be able to use their own judgment when meting out discipline. There will be those who abuse their authority, but I believe they would be the exception, not the rule. I don't think a one-size-fits-all discipline policy is appropriate.

You didn't call the people creating the zero tolerance policies "do-gooders". That is what you called the people filing lawsuits to end racism.

The people who created the zero tolerance policy in response to those lawsuits should instead have worked on the racism. I do not support their decision to take the easy way out.

Watch out, he's going to put peanut butter on some bread with that thing.

(its more disturbing that the kid wears suits to school)

It's definitely taking something too far, but it's not "political correctness" -- since the zero-tolerance policy has nothing to do with politics, or opinion or commentary of any type. What it's taking too far is the effort to protect children, to make the world a risk-free place.

But the zero-tolerance policies don't exist strictly because of a desire to protect the chil'ren; they exist because of a fear of inconsistent application of rules, bias claims and lawsuits.

This is basically mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines all over again and as case after case shows it doesn't work, and simply results in a system of injustice being codified. Every situation is different. You don't bring the equivalent of a wrecking ball to a situation, when the equivalent of tweezers would have resolved the issue to the satisfaction of all parties.

i'm not, of course, defending the idea of "zero tolerance" which is a right-wing autocratic slogan designed with callous disregard for the reality of its implementation.

but one can hardly expect a 6-year old to know such rules without even a warning and to then BENEFIT from 45 days amongst kids who actually BELONG in reform school.

if you're going to have zero tolerance, fine the parents or something. but don't punish the kid.

And the stupid, fucking idiots who made those rules.

And the stupid, fucking idiots who heard about those rules and didn't think it was a bad thing.

Because if they do, every single employee there should be fired.

Looks like over 20,000 have done likewise so far. I encourage fellow DUers to do this, and also contact the school officials prior to the meeting tomorrow night, if you feel it's appropriate. When you read more about Zachary and his "record of accomplishments" I'm pretty sure you'll want to lend some support.

Hang in there, Zachary!

Sigh.

Wait, it just loaded! 23,676!

May the truth set Zachary free!

Yeah, it really does sound pretty stupid that a kid can't take camping equipment to school. Sounds silly as hell to me that silverware is outlawed (I keep thinking of the slogan "When you outlaw spoons, soon only outlaws will have spoons...") This all sounds really over the top.

Having said all that, I have to ask is WHY the parents let the kid take the set to school? Were they not aware of the district policy that does not allow blades of any kind at school?

We have to co-sign a district policy statement every year at the start of the school year. It has to be signed by both the parents and the kids and it outlines everything they can think of pertaining to discipline issues--even down to the dress code and how wide shoulder straps need to be on kids' shirts.

I dunno. Poor little kid probably had no idea and the adult have all gone nuts around him.


Laura

backpack or pocket without saying anything.

And, even if they did know, it wouldn't necessarily occur to them to think of his Cub Scout eating utensil set as a possible weapon -- I'm not at all certain that *I* would have. I would have thought of it as being exactly what it is, a set of eating utensils.

I mean, for cryin' out loud, it's from the Cub Scouts! What could be more wholesome than the freakin' Cub Scouts?

As a parent, I most certainly would not have allowed my child to bring any sort of pocket knife to school. But a Cub Scout issued eating utensil kit? I honestly doubt that it would have occurred to me to see it as a possible "weapon".

The lack of common sense on the part of the school officials is beyond absurd. They could have simply confiscated the item, calmly explained to little 6 year old Zachery that the knife part of the set was a no-no, and sent a note home with him for his parents telling them to make sure he didn't bring it to school again, and that they could pick it up at the office tomorrow -- instead of treating the poor kid like he was some kind of dangerous criminal.

The school was WAAAAY out of line. I don't see why the parents should have any blame.

sw

school. :sarcasm: of course. But to answer yur question: "Why the parents let the kid take the set to school", assumes that they knew he was going to do it. That question distracts from the real problem and it isn't taking a SPORK or Advil to school.

The problem is "no tolerance" policies. They relieve the authorities from using the judgment we pay them to use.

It was her brother's. She saw something shiny and new and she put it in her schoolbag. He didn't notice it was missing and I didn't check school bags everyday.

PC, right or wrong, is about trying to reduce potential offensive to identity groups. That has nothing to do with "zero tolerance" policies, unless the case is a ZT policy on offensive language. The English language is a robust mutt with much hybrid vigor, but it still appreciates being treated kindly and responsibly. :)

FWIW, when I went to grade school (just before and just after Reagan), I owned a pocket knife, but I wouldn't have dreamed of bringing it to school, and I'd have thought anyone who did was weird. There wasn't any kind of formal policy against it that I was told about, it just seemed like common sense: it was "just a tool" when I was out camping or hiking, but what the heck was I gonna need it for at school? Sharpening pencils? A hammer is just a tool, too, and I had no reason to bring it to school either.

(The above shouldn't in any way be taken as a defense of the school's logic here. An eating utensil has a pretty clear and applicable use.)

The school would suspend some little hooligan with a very long history of disciplinary problems because he took a knife to school and used it to rob the other children of their lunch money. Said hooligan would go home and tell his mother, "I got suspended from school just for having a knife in my pocket. But Zachary brought a knife, and he was showing it to everybody, and he didn't get suspended at all."

Little Rotten Johnny's mother would be at the principal's office the next morning. "How DARE you suspend Little Rotten Johnny and not Zachary! Little Rotten Johnny just had a knife in his pocket. Zachary was flashing his around!"

'No, Epstein's Mother, Little Rotten Johnny was robbing his classmates with the knife.'

"That's not what Little Rotten Johnny said! He said..."

'Epstein's Mother, Little Rotten Johnny was robbing his classmates at knifepoint. We've got over a hundred witnesses"

"Ohhhhhh no. This isn't about any of that. My child would never do anything like that. It's because he's BLACK, isn't it?"

'It's because his heart is black, Epstein's Mother. Coal black. Pitch black. Black in ways no other heart has ever been. And that's why we suspended your son.'

"Oh...you're in trouble for that one. My LAWYER will be calling you!"

Nicely done!

have to avoid this kind of idiocy, but they allow politicians to look tough.

which is its purpose.

Do you realize how many lawsuits are filed against districts over this asinine behavior?

winnable lawsuits. Zero tolerance policies have been deteremined to be the most effective way of thwarting the maximum # of winnable lawsuits. Everyone is treated equally. This is not an argument by me for the policy, just stating what it is.

Not only are many of these winnable (and have resulted in sizable judgments) but they cost districts a lot of money to defend- money that more reasonable administrators would be spending on education- rather than gratifying their obsessions with power & punishment.

would likely happen. We need tort reform similar to what exists in the UK.

Let's turn the entire nation into the dystopia of Texas.

After all, who needs due process, proportionality and the rule of reason.

The UK is ridiculous.

particularly their abandonment of reason- their obsession with draconian punishments, libertarian firearms laws and the irrational fears that drive them.

And they're right- if one wanted to design a society into decline, these would be very important elements to include.

:eyes:

My how times have changed.
I remember taking a 3 ft cutlass (a curved sword)as a prop for a play I was in in middle school ca. 1983.
No teacher or administrator said a word other than to tell me it had to stay in my locker when no being used as a prop.
The bus driver never said a word either!

I feel bad for this kid who has been victimized by the adults that run his school district.

Zero-tolerance policies always lead to this stupidity. It's a Cub Scout tool for God's sake!

They should let him come back to school with a full apology.

Even zero tolerance has specific criteria. THis is just stupidity.

but at my elementary school in Arkansas in the '60s, students weren't allowed to carry pocket knives due to safety concerns. And our scissors had to be the blunt-end type. And I remember one time when several boys got paddled merely for playing "Super Bowl" on the playground (they got into a "dog pile" for imitating the Big Boys who had just finished Super Bowl I).

Next, he'll be carving soap bars from the restroom into handguns to plan his break out.

How insane is the world we live in?


AND IT'S NOT "POLITICAL CORRECTNESS" :wtf: :freak: :banghead:

And it IS a weapon.



It should have been confiscated and NOT given back, but
REFORM SCHOOL??????

That's CRAZY.

:crazy:

then banning boy scouts would be acceptable?

(I'm no fan of the boy scouts, but that's basically what is happening here)

Insanity rules the day.

Of course, as a geezer, I remember a time when common sense was a real goal, and paranoia was a medical condition not a political affiliation.

A teacher might then confiscate the thing, explain why to the boy, & call the parents for a non-emergency meeting. Where they would smile at the little boy, give the pocket knife back to Mom & Dad & live happily ever after.

Not embarrass & traumatize a 6-year-old or sentence him to the pen. Good grief. :banghead:

I hope this incident doesn't mess with his obvious natural enthusiasm for life.

Here's what he appears to have been busted with:

http://likecool.com/Case_Boy_Scouts_of_America_Caramel_Jigged_Bone_Hobo_Knife--Gadget--Gear.html

And what if he were an "ebonics"-speaking black child instead of a "self assured, well spoken little white boy"?

--------------------

And it's not 'political correctness", it's CAPITALISM.

It's the requirement for a mobile work force for capitalism to survive.

It's the invention of the "nuclear family" which can NOT EVER raise children effectively because we were evolved as creatures of community. But the "nuclear family" does supply the capitalists with a mobile work force of interchangeable work units.

And it's the need to keep these work units trained to obey...

She also took one of those camping utensils to school. They threatened to suspend her, put her in an alternative school, and a public flogging. I told them that I'd home school her before I put up with any more of that crap. They finally agreed to take her back without punishment if I agreed to have her evaluated. They would accept her if the shrink sent a letter stating that she was not dangerous. Jeez!