Zero-tolerance policy overridden in S. burbs

[Steff]

It is a bad thing. Shall we just lock the kid away until he's 18? When can he be allowed back into society? When shall he be allowed to play with other kids, go to a movies, walk the streets, go to the library, return to school? 3 months? 6 months? 2 years? 25 years?

 

Do you want to punish the kid foreveer for what may be a single instance of a kid trying to defend himself from bullies after teachers did nothing?

Forever...???

 

 

How about starting with the 2 year punishment and go from there.

 

Tex.. why are you taking this to the extreme? The kid has missed less than a year of schooling. Rather than btiching and moaning about it.. his guardians, and him, should be complying, admit that he made a stupid mistake, take the punishment, learn from it, and move on. Instead they are screaming that he's been wronged..?? What was that.. zero tolerance..? Slap him on the hand.. send him back to school.. so that next time he can bring a real gun and kill someone..?

[Queen Prawn]

Do you want to punish the kid foreveer for what may be a single instance of a kid trying to defend himself from bullies after teachers did nothing?

I was picked on quite a bit in grammar school, but never once thought about bringing a gun (or any other kind of weapon) to school to harm the bullies. That's where the teachers and PARENTS/GUARDIAN of this child have failed. The answer to someone picking on you is not to go out and get a gun to do damage (sometimes fatal).

 

Another consequence I am sure this child (nor obviously his guardian) did not think of is that he could end up hurt someone that has nothing to do with his problem.

 

Maybe gramma should be more worried about why this kid thinks shooting someone is an answer to be bullyied.

[Steff]

Maybe gramma should be more worried about why this kid thinks shooting someone is an answer to be bullyied.

Amen QP. That's the root of the problem. And it should be investigated and solved BEFORE this, or any child who resorts to violence as a means to solve a problem, is allowed to socialize with other children. School is a right.. but so is being safe at school. It's a no brainer, to most I would think, which one is more important.

[Texsox]

Forever...??? 

 

 

How about starting with the 2 year punishment and go from there.

 

Tex.. why are you taking this to the extreme? The kid has missed less than a year of schooling. Rather than btiching and moaning about it.. his guardians, and him, should be complying, admit that he made a stupid mistake, take the punishment, learn from it, and move on. Instead they are screaming that he's been wronged..?? What was that.. zero tolerance..? Slap him on the hand.. send him back to school.. so that next time he can bring a real gun and kill someone..? 

Because in some post Columbine, post 9/11 society we went to extremes and tied the hands of people to use some common sense in handling these issues. We can turn back the clock and put some reason back into these policies.

 

Zero Tolernance has gotten:

 

A 13 year old girl expelled for bring Midol to school, she didn't want to bother the school nurse and was a bit embarrased about having her period. Violated the no drugs ban.

 

A 11 year old girl expelled for bring a plastic butter knife to school to cut the chicken in her lunch box. Violated the no weapons policy.

 

We need to allow people to make decisions based on the circumstances at hand and not based on some unflexing policy.

 

I am in favor of people close to the situation making the decision, not some one size fits all punishment. Look at the flip side, what about the kid who hasn't changed, should he be allowed back in 2-years because that's the punishment? He must be cured because he's been gone two years.

[Texsox]

If someone can explain to me why two years is a magical number I could be convinced it is better than allowing people to decide. Why he isn't ready in 1 year 11 months but he is at 2 years. Why everyone needs two years, why some kids don't need three or four and some only one. Why some kids shouldn't be permanately expelled and some should only be given a warning.

 

Months or years before this situation happened someone decided that this kid, in this situation, with that pellet gun, for those reasons, should sit out exactly two years.

 

I find it amazing that they knew exactly what was best for everyone involved before it happened.

[Steff]

I fail to see how a midol for cramps or a plastic knife to cut lunch compares to a kid stating he brought a GUN to school to HARM others. NO comparison. Not even close.

[EvilMonkey]

It is a bad thing. Shall we just lock the kid away until he's 18? When can he be allowed back into society? When shall he be allowed to play with other kids, go to a movies, walk the streets, go to the library, return to school? 3 months? 6 months? 2 years? 25 years?

 

(note, Juddling typed this, on EvilMonkey's computer! Forgot to log him out.)

 

Do you want to punish the kid foreveer for what may be a single instance of a kid trying to defend himself from bullies after teachers did nothing?

Noone is saying to lock the kid up until he's 18. all i think Evilmonkey and i were trying to say is that the school is following it's VERY CLEAR policy. the beauty of the no tolerance policy is that there is no grey area. you bring a weapon to school and you're gone. before this rule the district had a case by case policy.......and just take a wild guess what happened to that???? Everytime a child was punished....mommy or daddy or grandma would play the race card. (our district is about 70 % minority) saying they were punished too harshly because they were black. Guess what....the district took care of that problem by starting the no-tolerance policy. Notice that in the present case the grandma isn't arguing race....that's the beauty of the policy.

The power or lack thereof in the gun is NOT the issue. The issue is that the kid broke a very clear policy should serve the punishment.

In the courts the judge didn't declare the rule illegal..it wasn't struck down....the school board wasn't told to change the rule...the judge just overruled it. If the rule is legally ok....then i'm pissed as hell that the judge decided on his own to disregard it.

 

as far as the teacher goes....in court the teacher says she was told by the student of the bullying one time and did what she is supposed to do. filed a form with the office and the two kids were held after and talked to. after that she heard nothing even after asking the kid if the situation had improved. If the kid didn't want to tell the teacher then he should have told the grandmother. if my kid comes home and tells me that she is getting picked on and after reported complaints nothing is done...i'm taking matters to the office. I truly believe that this kids Grandma didn't know her grandson had the gun or was taking it to school but you know what........IT DOESN'T MATTER. If the grandmother can't afford to home school or send the kid to private school...IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM!!! as a taxpayer into my school system.....i'm pissed that my school board which doesn't have enough money as is has to shell out an extra $400-$600 a week to tutor this "good" kid who "wants nothing more than to go to school".

 

Juddling

[Texsox]

I fail to see how a midol for cramps or a plastic knife to cut lunch compares to a kid stating he brought a GUN to school to HARM others. NO comparison. Not even close.

You are correct there isn't a fair comparison except one:

 

The comparison is all three got expelled, without appeals, without any options for the educators. The girl with the butter knife was a honor roll student with perfect behavior but the school's hands were tied because of a zero tolerance policy.

[Steff]

If someone can explain to me why two years is a magical number I could be convinced it is better than allowing people to decide. Why he isn't ready in 1 year 11 months but he is at 2 years. Why everyone needs two years, why some kids don't need three or four and some only one. Why some kids shouldn't be permanately expelled and some should only be given a warning.

 

Months or years before this situation happened someone decided that this kid, in this situation, with that pellet gun, for those reasons, should sit out exactly two years.

 

I find it amazing that they knew exactly what was best for everyone involved before it happened.

IMO.. what's best is the kid never be allowed in public school again. Guns, bb, pellet, or live ammo, kill. I don't want innocent children running that kind of risk.

 

 

I'm choosing to long longer debate this with you Tex, as someone who apparently fails to see the magnitude of this situation, it's kinda making me sick. I'm done.

[Texsox]

IMO.. what's best is the kid never be allowed in public school again. Guns, bb, pellet, or live ammo, kill. I don't want innocent children running that kind of risk.

 

 

I'm choosing to long longer debate this with you Tex, as someone who apparently fails to see the magnitude of this situation, it's kinda making me sick. I'm done.

And the girl with the butter knife is cast in the same net. Not allowed back in her school. Can you not see the insanity in these rules?

 

Why are people better equiped to make a one size fits all policy years in advance but not equiped to make a case by case based on the facts of that particular situation?

 

Steff, so you also agree the girl with Midol and the girl with the butter knife should also have been expelled? They knew the policy, the signed it. Is society better off?

[Texsox]

IMO.. what's best is the kid never be allowed in public school again. Guns, bb, pellet, or live ammo, kill. I don't want innocent children running that kind of risk.

 

 

I'm choosing to long longer debate this with you Tex, as someone who apparently fails to see the magnitude of this situation, it's kinda making me sick. I'm done.

In some cases that is exactly what should happen. But these one size fits all policies do not allow for that. Perhaps this kid should never be allowed back in, instead it was decided years ago he should have two years out. I'm stating that someone should decide when THIS KID should be allowed back in. I don't care if they say 2 months or never. As long as it applies to this kid. It scares me they will just automatically allow him back in two years from now.

[Steff]

In my world, I follow the rules. With the way things are, I'll lean towards the side of caution. Back in my day.. I didn't take even asprin to school, and I don't ever recall taking my own forks, etc.. either. If it was needed in school.. it was already there.

 

Again, I like you Tex.. and I don't feel this conversation is the least bit benificial, but I felt you deserved a response. But now I'm done.

[juddling]

Texsox...let me ask a simple question. Even without the zero-tolerence policy, the kid brought a gun(pellet or no pellet..a gun nonetheless) to school to do harm to other students. Are you seriously saying that he shouldn't be removed from the school???

At worst...he sits out a year then the following school year he is eligible for the district's alternative school.

 

juddling

[hammerhead johnson]

I wasn't gonna say anything, but....

 

My younger brother brought a knife to school when he was in the 3rd grade at St. Ladislaus. He pulled it out on a kid who was messing with his buddy. He was suspended for a couple days & ordered to see a psychiatrist.

 

He recently graduated from Loyola with a 3.75 GPA & he's geting ready to attend Law School.

 

To me, pulling a knife on a kid is ten times worse than having a pellet gun in your backpack. That situation really sucked for my family because we all had to attend those visits to the psychiatrist, but looking back on it now, we laugh it off.

 

This kid ain't gonna be able to laugh off this incident when he's looking back on it in ten years from now. Why? Because everyone is so paranoid on the strength of a few isolated instances.

 

I checked out that "Bowling For Columbine" documentary recently, and the one point that really hits home is that the media are a bunch of fear mongerers. Take it for what it's worth, I suppose.

[Texsox]

Texsox...let me ask a simple question.  Even without the zero-tolerence policy, the kid brought a gun(pellet or no pellet..a gun nonetheless) to school to do harm to other students.  Are you seriously saying that he shouldn't be removed from the school???

At worst...he sits out a year then the following school year he is eligible for the district's alternative school. 

 

juddling

Are you seriously saying the school board elected professionals (car salesman, home makers, secretaries, etc. ) know enough to determine years in advance, when a kid who brings a gun is safe to have return?

 

I am not saving he shouldn't be removed. I am saying that some car salesman school board member is not the one to determine what is safe for my kids. You trust the two years that the elected school board politicians decided was enough. I'll trust child health care professionals who evaluate each kid.

 

I think that each case should be evaluated individually. Some kids may never be safe and should never be allowed back in school, others may be safe before 2 years.

 

Most of these zero tolerance laws were enacted because local school boards felt they knew better than trained child professionals when a kid would be safe in society. Do you really prefer the school board vs. child mental health professionals to decide these matters?

 

Remember we also had a 1st grader expelled for sexual harrasement for trying to kiss another 1st grader.

 

I do not believe a one size fits all policy is in our best interest. I want each kid evaluated to make certain he is safe to be in a school with my kids. I don't want some car salesman on the school board to tell me some kid is safe to be around my kid because the was punished for two years.

 

You can trust in the two year punishment that the politicians on the school year decided was enough for bringing a gun too school. I do not place that much faith in elected officials. I would rather each kid get evaluated by professionals.

[juddling]

Tex...i am seriously saying that the school board adopted a rule and a punishment that many school boards across the country have adopted. In a perfect world i'd love to have some mental health professionals on the school board but i doubt they would want to give up their time for the pay of a school board member. We do have a couple of people including the school superintendant who have degrees in education and kid psychology....so to a point i have to trust these people to make this decision. Besides....suppose a professional saw two kids in virtually the same situation...one white and one black. suppose after the interviews and testing (which by the way in this case the district wants the boy tested....grandmother refuses) he concludes the white kid isn't a danger and is let back into school while the black kid has underlying issues (hmm..say a family life where older siblings encourage use of guns to solve problems) and needs to be held out longer. I would bet my house and my two dogs that racism would be screamed to high heaven and even MORE lawsuits brought about.

Again.....zero-tolerance works because it's clear and simple. you bring a weapon you're gone. (unless you can find a liberal judge i guess)

 

juddling

[Texsox]

Tex...i am seriously saying that the school board adopted a rule and a punishment that many school boards across the country have adopted.  In a perfect world i'd love to have some mental health professionals on the school board but i doubt they would want to give up their time for the pay of a school board member.  We do have a couple of people including the school superintendant who have degrees in education and kid psychology....so to a point i have to trust these people to make this decision.  Besides....suppose a professional saw two kids in virtually the same situation...one white and one black. suppose after the interviews and testing (which by the way in this case the district wants the boy tested....grandmother refuses) he concludes the white kid isn't a danger and is let back into school while the black kid has underlying issues (hmm..say a family life where older siblings encourage use of guns to solve problems) and needs to be held out longer. I would bet my house and my two dogs that racism would be screamed to high heaven and even MORE lawsuits brought about. 

Again.....zero-tolerance works because it's clear and simple.  you bring a weapon you're gone. (unless you can find a liberal judge i guess)

 

juddling

Here's Zero Tolerance Working

 

Zero tolerance or zero common sense?

 

Parents are laughing at the intolerance of the zero tolerance rules that have been instituted in so many public schools. Laughing, that is, unless it is their own sons who are victimized by policies that seem to lack common sense. It's a serious matter when a good child is expelled from school, suspended or sent to a detention facility to take classes with real delinquents. Here are some recent examples of how the zero tolerance hatchet is wielded in public schools.

 

A first-grader at Struthers Elementary School in Youngstown, Ohio, was suspended for 10 days for taking home a plastic knife from the school cafeteria in his book bag. The 6-year-old wasn't threatening anyone; he just wanted to show his mother he had learned how to spread butter on his bread.

 

A third-grader at O'Rourke Elementary School in Mobile, Ala., was given a five-day suspension for violating the substance abuse policy after classmates reported that he took a "purple pill." His offense was taking a multivitamin with his lunch.

 

At LaSalle Middle School in Greeley, Colo., three 13-year-old boys were given one-year suspensions because one of the students brought to school a key chain with a 2 1/2-inch laser pointer. The school called it a "firearm facsimile" and sent one of the boys, a good student who had never before been in trouble, to an alternative program where he is taking classes with young criminals and juvenile delinquents in "anger management," "conflict resolution" and gangs.

 

Four kindergartners at Wilson Elementary School in Sayreville, N.J., were suspended for three days for playing a make-believe game of cops and robbers during recess, using their fingers as guns. This case is now before the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

 

When seven fourth-grade boys, who had never before been in trouble, at Dry Creek Elementary School in Colorado were discovered pointing "finger guns" at each other while playing a game of soldiers and aliens during recess, the principal found them in violation of the school's zero tolerance policy. After quizzing them about whether their parents owned guns, she required them to serve a one-week detention during lunchtime, sitting in the hall where they were teased and taunted by other students.

 

An 8-year-old at South Elementary school in Jonesboro, Ark., was punished with detention for pointing a chicken strip at another student in the cafeteria while saying "pow, pow, pow."

 

A 7-year-old at the Edgewood Independent School District in San Antonio, Texas, was banished for 11 days to an "alternative school" for troubled students when he was caught bringing a pocketknife to school. For three days, he was the only first-grader at the facility among older students guilty of serious offenses.

 

A 12-year-old at Magoffin Middle School in El Paso, Texas, stuck out his tongue at a girl who had declined his invitation to be his girlfriend. School administrators called this sexual harassment and suspended him for three days.

 

When the Fred A. Anderson Elementary School in Bayboro, N.C., held a Camouflage Day, a 9-year-old proudly came in his new duck-hunting outfit. His joy was smashed when the teacher discovered an empty shotgun shell in his pocket left over from a weekend outing with his father, and punished the straight-A student with a five-day suspension.

 

In Hurst, Texas, a 16-year-old honor student was expelled from high school after a security guard found a butter knife in the bed of his pickup truck parked on school grounds. The knife apparently fell out of a box of household items he and his father had transported the previous day from his grandmother's home to a local Goodwill store. School officials claimed that the butter knife was a danger to other students and placed him in a disciplinary alternative school for five days.

 

Two 8-year-old boys who pointed paper guns at classmates in Irvington, N.J., were charged with "making terrorist threats." A judge ultimately dismissed their case, but the incident may remain on court records until the boys are 18.

 

In a North Carolina preschool called Kids Gym Schoolhouse, the state evaluator deducted five points from its high rating because plastic soldiers were found in the play area. The toys were said to "reflect stereotyping and violence and can be potentially dangerous if children use them to act out violent themes."

 

Zero tolerance is not protecting us from terrorists or criminals. It is making good children disrespect school authorities.

[Texsox]

More zero tolerance working

More Zero Tolerance = Zero Thought.

 

A La Salle student and his parents are preparing to fight the school district after he was expelled for a year because he played with a friend’s miniature gunlike laser pointer.

 

Mitch Muller is a 13-year-old seventh-grader at La Salle Middle School, where he has never been in trouble before. That is, before last November when he saw a friend playing with a laser pointer in a business class.

 

Mitch asked to see the pointer, which is about 2 1/2 inches long and 1 1/2 inches wide. He admits he played with it for a few minutes, shining the red dot from the laser beam around the classroom. Then he gave it back to his friend.

 

Now, Mitch and two of his friends have been expelled from school for a full year because they played with a “firearm facsimile” in school.

 

And Mitch’s family is angry. “It was so small,” said his mother, Lova Zahary. “And it had an orange tip on the end of the barrel, which is supposed to be on toy guns so people will know they are toys.”

 

“It’s the size of the ‘gun’ that makes this whole thing so ridiculous,” said Mitch’s grandmother, Lynn Young, a Colorado statehouse lobbyist who lives in Arvada. She is currently lining up state legislators to speak out for her grandson.

 

“And it wasn’t even Mitch’s. He held it for only a few minutes, then gave it back,” she added.

 

Mitch says his friend bought the laser pointer at a Gilcrest store. He brought it to school in mid-November, and another friend brought it into Mitch’s class that day. After class, the teacher took it from the other friend. A few days later, all three boys were expelled.

 

Mitch’s parents are also upset with the school principal, Bruce Hankins, who apparently obtained a confession from Mitch, then told him to sign it. No other adult — including Mitch’s parents — were in the office when the confession was obtained and signed.

 

Because the incident involves a minor, Hankins said he couldn’t talk about it. Valley School District Re-1 Superintendent Jo Barbie also said she couldn’t discuss specifics in the case, and also said she couldn’t allow reporters to see the laser pointer or take a photo of it.

However, she is firm in backing her principal and the decision to expel Mitch. “Every student gets a copy of the Code of Conduct,” Barbie said. “And they all agree to follow that code.”

 

On Page 23 of the Code of Conduct, a dangerous weapon is described as “A firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or a firearm facsimile.”

 

Speaking of “firearm facsimiles,” Barbie said even though the laser gun is small, it could still look like a real gun. “We have expelled students before because of the same type of laser pointer,” Barbie said. “We must stay consistent and follow the Code of Conduct.”

 

Laser pointers also are not allowed in school, but possession of one does not result in expulsion.

 

She said every student problem in the school is handled separately and is usually a judgment call, which is how Mitch’s problem was handled.

 

The boy’s parents have hired an attorney, Todd Taylor of Greeley, who has secured a hearing before the Valley Re-1 school board at 6:15 p.m. Jan. 15.

 

He said he will argue that the “gun” is too small to resemble an actual gun, and according to state law, a facsimile gun in school must “reasonably be mistaken for an actual firearm.” That statement is not part of the school’s Code of Conduct.

 

Meanwhile, Mitch has been out of school since Nov. 19, when the school principal called his mother and told her to take her son home because he was a danger to the other students. The official expulsion hearing was Dec. 10, and on Dec. 11 the three boys were officially expelled for one year.

 

Mitch is attending an “Alternative to Expulsion Program” in Greeley, and upon completion of the six-week program, he could be reinstated in school.

 

But his parents want the expulsion reversed and taken off Mitch’s school record. “This doesn’t make any sense,” said his mother.

 

“Mitch was only one of the students who played with the laser pointer for a few minutes that day. And it doesn’t even look like a real gun.

 

“If you want to see something that looks like a real gun, I understand that the school Christmas program had a student in a toy soldier costume, and he was carrying a prop that looked like a real rifle,” Zahary said. “How do they justify that?”

[Texsox]

Several Westfield High School students who handed out candy canes with religious note to their classmates the week before Christmas are bracing for possible suspension from school after they return from winter break tomorrow.

 

The students, who were forbidden by school administrators to distribute the candy and messages, are accusing school officials of violating their rights to free speech and expression.

 

''No matter what they do, we're not backing down,'' Stephen Grabowski, 16, said yesterday. ''We really believe that Jesus Christ is Lord, and we're prepared to fight. They picked the wrong people to step on.''

 

But school administrators have said the issue is not religion. They said they are adhering to a policy that bars students from passing out non-school-related literature on campus.

 

''We do not allow students to distribute non-school curriculum or activity-related literature of any kind directly to other students on school grounds,'' Superintendent Thomas McDowell wrote on Dec. 18 to Erik Stanley, an attorney for the Liberty Counsel, a religious civil liberties organization. Stanley had written to McDowell on the students' behalf. ''We do not single out students based upon the content of their message, in this or any other instance,'' McDowell wrote.

 

Grabowski, who describes himself as a born-again Christian and co-leader of the school's Bible Club, said the group has distributed the candy canes in the past. When they sought permission to hand out the candy canes this year, however, their request was denied. The students were told that violating the school's policy could get them suspended, he said.

 

''We just really need to get the message out to everyone that Jesus Christ is Lord. We don't want the meaning of Christmas to get lost in all the commercialism and such,'' Grabowski said. ''Free speech is free speech. It shouldn't be restricted to wherever you are.''

 

Seven students this year handed out about 450 candy canes between classes and during lunch, Grabowski said.

 

Taped to each was a piece of paper that included a religious explanation for the candy cane's shape and colors. The J shape stands for ''Jesus,'' or, when inverted, symbolizes a shepherd's staff, Grabowski said. The white is for Jesus's purity, and the red is for the blood he shed, Grabowski said. The notes also included some Bible verses and a prayer.

 

McDowell said he learned about the distribution of the candy canes through an article in the local paper, but neither he nor the principal had spoken to the students because of the holiday break.

 

If an investigation determines students did pass out the candy canes, McDowell said, the students would be disciplined accordingly.

[Texsox]

Texas: A teenager was disciplined for sharing medication used to treat asthma, but he said it saved his girlfriend's life, News2Houston reported. Andra Ferguson and her boyfriend, Brandon Kivi, both 15, use the same type of asthma medicine, Albuterol Inhalation Aerosol. But the school nurse said it was a violation of the district's no-tolerance drug policy, and reported Kivi to the campus police. The next day, he was arrested and accused of delivering a dangerous drug. Kivi was also suspended from school for three days. He could face expulsion and sent to juvenile detention on juvenile drug charges.

[EvilMonkey]

By harping on the zero tolerance crap you are still missing the point. This kid was kicked out for bringing a weapon to school with intent to harm other students. Argue about the length all you want, but I don't want that little bastard anywhere near my kid. In this particular case, the district WANTED to have him examined by a 'professional', but the grandmother refused. To be brutally honest, I don't give a f*** what this kid does, as long as it is not in the same school as my kid. Oh, and I don't want to have to pay for HIS f***up. Yeah, he made a mistake, a BIG one. What if he had succeeded in shooting one of the kids. Would it be OK then to keep him out of school for 2 years? If you want to argue zero tolerance, you won't get too much of a fight from me. Quick Takes in the Sun-Times posts things about zero tolerance stuff all the time. I agree, they can go overboard. Did they go overboard in this case? NO! However, in the litigeous (sp?) society, I understand why they were put into place. They completely remove the race card, or favoritism card, etc. But zero tolerance here isn't the issue. The GUN and the INTENT TO HARM are the issues. If you can't see that this kid needs to be removed from the mainstream school for a while, then maybe we need to end this now, because I don't think we are ever going to agree.

[EvilMonkey]

JUDDLING! Remember to log me out next time you want to rant! I have enough issues here with my own opinions! Later bro.

[Texsox]

By harping on the zero tolerance crap you are still missing the point.  This kid was kicked out for bringing a weapon to school with intent to harm other students.  Argue about the length all you want, but I don't want that little bastard anywhere near my kid.  In this particular case, the district WANTED to have him examined by a 'professional', but the grandmother refused.  To be brutally honest, I don't give a f*** what this kid does, as long as it is not in the same school as my kid. Oh, and I don't want to have to pay for HIS f***up. Yeah, he made a mistake, a BIG one.  What if he had succeeded in shooting one of the kids.  Would it be OK then to keep him out of school for 2 years?  If you want to argue zero tolerance, you won't get too much of a fight from me.  Quick Takes in the Sun-Times posts things about zero tolerance stuff all the time.  I agree, they can go overboard. Did they go overboard in this case?  NO!  However, in the litigeous (sp?) society, I understand why they were put into place.  They completely remove the race card, or favoritism card, etc.  But zero tolerance here isn't the issue.  The GUN and the INTENT TO HARM are the issues.  If you can't see that this kid needs to be removed from the mainstream school for a while, then maybe you need to get your head out of your ass.

Evil you are arguing the kid should be back in school in two years, I'm arguing he may never be ready to come back to school. Who is being more responsible? You are trusting the auto mechanic on the school board that decided that gang bangers and honor roll students are both rehabbed in exactly 2 years. You are saying you do not want him in a classroom with your kids, then arguing that he should be allowed back into the classroom in exactly two years as decided by the elected school board members.

 

By not reading my posts, you are missing the point. These zero tolerance laws are handcuffing trained adults from making decisions. I am saying the best approach is allowing this kid back in the classroom when he isn't a threat, not a minute before. You are arguing he'll be ready in exactly two years. I'm arguing it may be 1 year 6 months, it may be never.

 

You don't want this kid in your kid's classroom, but you keep arguing that just staying away exactly two years will keep your kid safe. I do not want this kid around my kid until he is evaluated and proves he is safe.

 

Now whose head up up his ass? Pull your head out of your ass in two years when this kid is allowed back without any evaluation and thank the idiots on the school board who knew years ago this kid could be rehabbed in exactly two years without even meeting him. Not 1 year 11 months or three years, but exactly 2 years.

 

Justice Zero Tolerance style

Gang banger who has failed every class brings 45 auto to school? Two Years.

Honor Student brings pellet gun? Two years

Can't people in your town think? Can they not make decisions based on the unique circumstances? Nope they are idiots and need zero tolerance guidelines to tell them what to do.

 

And just in case you still do not understand

 

I AM NOT ARGUING THIS KID SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN NOW. I AM ARGUING THE KID SHOULD BE EVALUATED BEFORE BEING ALLOWED TO RETURN, NOT A f***ING MINUTE SOONER. TWO YEARS IS NOT A MAGIC NUMBER THAT WILL KEEP ANYONE SAFE. I DO NOT TRUST A DECISION THE SCHOOL BOARD MADE WITHOUT HAVING ANY INFORMATION ON THIS KID OR WHAT HE DID THAT STATES IN TWO YEARS HE IS SAFE TO BE AROUND MY KIDS. HOW THE f*** DID THE SCHOOL BOARD KNOW THAT THIS KID COULD BE REHABBED IN EXACTLY TWO YEARS? ARE THEY PSYCHICS?

 

Why do you put more faith in this magical two years as determined by an elected school board than the opinion of child health workers?

[hammerhead johnson]

Justice Zero Tolerance style

Gang banger who has failed every class brings 45 auto to school? Two Years.

Honor Student brings pellet gun? Two years

Can't people in your town think? Can they not make decisions based on the unique circumstances? Nope they are idiots and need zero tolerance guidelines to tell them what to do.

[EvilMonkey]

READ MY POSTS! I NEVER EVER ARGUED THAT 2 YEARS WAS SOME MAGICAL NUMBER THAT WOULD ALLOW THE IDIOT BACK INTO SCHOOL!!! I am arguing that some stupid judge decided that even one year isn't enough and wants to let him back in now. The school WANTED to have him evaluated, but the guardian refuses. I fully comprehend and understand your points on zero tolerance rules. Zero tolerance rules are not what this post is really about, bringing a weapon to school IS. If you read my last post, you will see that I somewhat agree with you on how stupid they can be. I NEVER ONCE argued he should be let back in at all! And after a suspension for weapons violations, an exam IS required before they can come back to the main school. By the school rules, they just don't want him back sooner than 2 years. If after that time, and after the evaluation, they feel he is still a threat, he won't be let back in. There is also an alternative school he can go to, but he has to be in 6th grade to be eligible for that (he would be in 5th grade this year). There is the 'check and balance' I think you may be looking for.

 

As for, "Can't people in your town think? Can they not make decisions based on the unique circumstances? Nope they are idiots and need zero tolerance guidelines to tell them what to do" zero tolerance rules came about thanks to our lovely legal profession. The district had been sued three times in the past for 'racial discrimination' issues when a black student got what was deemed a more severe punishment for a similar problem than a white student got.

 

On a side note, you seem to have little faith in the 'car salesman' or 'mechanic' who is on the school board. How about the mechanic or salesman on a jury? They surely are not 'professional' juroists, yet they could be deciding someone's life! Or have you just had bad auto experiences? On ANOTHER side note, please note that I had edited my initial post BEFORE I saw your reply. I had let my anger get to me, and I had changed that last line. You must have been replying whle I was changing.