Florida: Student arrested for cutting food with knife


PDA






AZRickD
December 16, 2007, 03:57 PM
No matter where you're from, please consider contacting these school officials.

http://www.local6.com/news/14857286/detail.html

Student Arrested After Cutting Food With Knife
10-Year-Old Charged With Possession Of Weapon On School Property

An elementary student in Marion County was arrested Thursday after school officials found her cutting food during lunch with a knife that she brought from home, police said.

The 10-year-old girl, a student at Sunrise Elementary School in
Ocala, was charged possession of a weapon on school property, which is a felony.

According to authorities, school employees spotted the girl cutting her food while she was eating lunch and took the steak knife from her.

The girl told sheriff's deputies that she had brought the knife to
school on more than one occasion in the past.

Students told officials that the girl did not threaten anyone with
the knife.

The girl was arrested and transported to the Juvenile Assessment Center.

Watch Local 6 News for more on this story

Don't preach to the choir. Try telling the school administrators...

http://www.marion.k12.fl.us/schools/sne/

Sunrise Elementary School
375 Marion Oaks Course
Ocala, FL 34473
Phone: (352) 671-6200
Fax: (352) 671-6206
(800) 955-8770 (FRS)

Isaac.BurgessIV@marion.k12.fl.us

Here's the principal with no principles

Isaac.BurgessIV@marion.k12.fl.us

http://www.marion.k12.fl.us/schools/sne/assets/burgess.jpg

Patricia Doles -- Asst Principal Patricia.Doles@marion.k12.fl.us

Richard Ruben -- Coordinator Richard.Rubin@marion.k12.fl.us

The Leadership Staff

http://www.marion.k12.fl.us/schools/sne/assets/leadership.jpg

Ms. Gillian Davis -- Dean of Discipline Gillian.Davis@marion.k12.fl.us

Delores Holcomb -- Guidance Counselor Delores.Holcomb@marion.k12.fl.us

Ms Karen Ramos-Cedeno Guidance Counselor Karen.Ramos-
Cedeno@marion.k12.fl.us

Ms Marie Valletta -- Media Specialist Marie.Valletta@marion.k12.fl.us

If you enjoyed reading about "Florida: Student arrested for cutting food with knife" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Creature
December 16, 2007, 04:09 PM
Why would I contact the school? The child had a knife...she has admitted broken the rulesmultiple times by bringing a knife onto school grounds.

The rules are in place...the rules were violated. Seems like everything was done as should have been done. Let the courts sort it out.

Norton
December 16, 2007, 04:12 PM
Don't waste your breath with the school level folks. If this school system is like most large ones, once the referral is written it goes to the Central Office where some administrative wonk deals with it.

Sometimes it is called Pupil Services, Student Services or some other non-descriptor.

Largely, in cases like this where it involves a "weapon", the principal is done with the decision making once the discipline form is written.

Aim for the superintendent's office.

AntiqueCollector
December 16, 2007, 04:17 PM
Zero tolerance policies equal zero intelligence policies. It was a knife for eating, not a weapon, the student never threatened anyone. Now the kid could be a felon and never have the chance to own a firearm? I don't see how anyone can defend that at all. I'll email them, but I too do not think it will make any difference. These school officials are so out of touch with reality usually.

joab
December 16, 2007, 04:21 PM
Granted the rule is stupid and the punishment is ludicrous
But these rules are not a secret known only to the upper classmen or the inner circles
They have been in place for a long time and ny student who violates them is either stupid or not paying attention

Something should be done about these zero tolerance policies but it is hard to feel a lot of sympathy for this individual student, unless she did it to draw attention and make a stand

AntiqueCollector
December 16, 2007, 04:27 PM
We continue down this road we'll be like the UK eventually. People there have sat back and allowed it to happen, perhaps we shouldn't.

FLORIDA KEVIN
December 16, 2007, 04:46 PM
i keep waiting for the first account of a school assault by SPORK
and whats with the parents they know better even if the child doesnt ! Nothing will happen except we will spend public money in court costs and a young child gets introduced to the legal system ! very little good was done by this becasue school officials like to protect themselves by wrapping themselves in "policy " instead of rational thought ! Shame on the school for having her arrested instead of just confiscating the knife and counciling her about the rules ! Shame on the parents because she probably packed her own lunch ! The public safety has not been protected by his idiotic call by school officials ! What a bunch of BS!! kevin

zxcvbob
December 16, 2007, 04:53 PM
Why would I contact the school? The child had a knife...she has admitted broken the rulesmultiple times by bringing a knife onto school grounds. The rules are in place...the rules were violated. Seems like everything was done as should have been done. Let the courts sort it out.


Why waste the courts' time? The principal should have just summarily executed her. :rolleyes:

Heavy Metal Hero
December 16, 2007, 05:02 PM
Do they still give plastic knives out in schools?

Geno
December 16, 2007, 05:13 PM
Someone detail for me, please, the specifics of Zero Tolerance. There are 3 criteria to be met, and all 3 must be met:

1. ?
2. ?
3. ?

I have posted them repeatedly. I will merely say, zero tolerance, per the law, has not been met. Number 1 has been met. Numbers 2 and 3 have not.

Doc2005

Cannonball888
December 16, 2007, 05:22 PM
I wonder if a spife is legal? :rolleyes:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/42/109848273_d0e9fd17d6.jpg?v=0

omcjf
December 16, 2007, 05:27 PM
Just another in a long, long list of reasons why my kids are homeschooled. My son is encouraged to bring his knives and multitools to 'school' and use them on a regular basis.

Zundfolge
December 16, 2007, 06:01 PM
Once you remove "intent" from the equation, you open the door to all sorts of abuses by those in power.

Zero Tolerance policies are designed to get students used to mindlessly following the edicts of "the authorities" and expecting to be crushed under a jackboot for even the slightest deviation from what Big Brother expects of you.

Robert Hairless
December 16, 2007, 06:15 PM
I'm confused by this particular policy. We taught our kids table manners that included cutting their food into bite sized pieces before eating it. We wanted them to use knives properly for that purpose. Don't parents today want their children to behave like civilized people?

And, a slightly different question, could this policy be responsible for the disgusting table manners of some children we see in restaurants? My kids were anything but prim and prissy but they didn't pick up their meat with a fork or their hands and rip it apart with their teeth. I see kids old enough to know better doing it today. I never thought it could be the result of school policy.

AZRickD
December 16, 2007, 06:19 PM
Creature posted:
Why would I contact the school?
I wouldn't waste my time trying to convince you. My purpose is to notify those who will act, to act.

To the others of you, apply heat. These folks live in a bubble unaware that others would dare think differently from them.

So, by all means, send them a note. And spread the word.

Rick

Geno
December 16, 2007, 06:45 PM
At my daughter's school, the "team" had students using steak knives at lunch on a daily basis...starting in 1st grade folks!!!

Next topic, nobody has found those 3 criteria for zero tolerance?! Please explain why this child should not be put out for zero tolerance.

Doc2005

gunsmith
December 16, 2007, 06:48 PM
We continue down this road we'll be like the UK eventually. People there have sat back and allowed it to happen, perhaps we shouldn't.

Evil prevails when good people do nothing

TexasRifleman
December 16, 2007, 07:01 PM
Zero tolerance arguments aside, I'd want to know one thing.

Does the school furnish knives for students to cut food and if so, who cares if there's one more knife?

The stupidity of today's educators continues to astound me.

Old Fuff
December 16, 2007, 07:02 PM
We are dealing here with a 10 year-old girl, who is supposed to understand and behave like an adult. I suspect that in her home she has been brought up, and learned to cut food with a knife. She may not understand that what's right at home isn't at school. I hate to admit this, but I use a knife to cut food (and other things) and I'm a long way for being a 10 year-old.

Doc2005 is correct, she hasn't broke the zero-tolerance law, just possibly a questionable school policy. And I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the people on this school's brain-dead staff use knives to cut food too. As for the law enforcement officers that were mentioned. Haven't they got anything more productive to do besides picking on a little girl? :cuss:

Geno
December 16, 2007, 07:22 PM
Zero Tolerance, these three must exist:

1. Item must constitute a weapon
2. Student must have knowingly brought the weapon
3. Student must have intent to cause great harm, damage, death, etc.

The student broke a school policy, that's all. Arrest the educators and officer(s) for conspiracy to falsely imprison. It would be as just. Frankly, I diagnose the educators and officers with chronic stupidity. I would be willing to plead it down to willful ignorance.

Doc2005

zxcvbob
December 16, 2007, 07:24 PM
Next topic, nobody has found those 3 criteria for zero tolerance?! Please explain why this child should not be put out for zero tolerance.


There's more than 3 in this case, in my opinion:

An actual weapon, not just an imaginary one.

The rule needs to be specific. Are knives specifically prohibited, or just weapons, or anything that could be used as a weapon (the last would be unconstitutionally vague.) If it does say knife, is the word defined?

There needs to be intent. (I think the legal term is "mens rea", or something like that.)

In this case, she said she has brought the knife several times before. The school did nothing the previous times; if the school knew about it, they gave implied consent (whether they realized it or not.)

Best regards,
Bob

robmkivseries70
December 16, 2007, 07:41 PM
Knowing what school food can be like, maybe she should bring her Light Weight Mcculloch Chain Saw to school. Thanks to Jerry Clower for the inspiration BTW
Best,
Rob

Blackfork
December 16, 2007, 07:45 PM
....when will you fight?

Oana
December 16, 2007, 07:46 PM
I plan to write. Hope they'll listen.

Who charges a 10-year-old with a felony for cutting her food with a knife?! Do the administrators even consider the consequences of that? What happened to saying, "Sorry, you can't have a knife at school"? :banghead:

Oana
December 16, 2007, 08:02 PM
Here's their parent-student handbook:
http://www.marion.k12.fl.us/schools/sne/newsletter/SNEHandbook.pdf

(In a supreme twist of irony, under their "Standards for Success" list for students, #7 states: "Use good table manners and appropriate behavior in the cafeteria.")

And here's the student code of conduct. Weapons are covered on pages 25 and 26.
http://www.marion.k12.fl.us/students/docs/CodeOfConduct.pdf

Looks like a knife other than a pocketknife or "blunt bladed table knife" merits a mandatory expulsion. And...

"However, Marion County Law Enforcement and the State Attorney’s office require the school administration to notify Law Enforcement of any weapon brought on campus. FS 790.115(2)(3)(b)." (25)

"In addition to the "corrective measures" listed in the Code of Student Conduct, possession of a weapon by any student while the student is on school property or in attendance at a school function may also result in criminal prosecution. (FS 790.115)" (26)

Geno
December 16, 2007, 08:15 PM
Oana:

"In addition to the "corrective measures" listed in the Code of Student Conduct, possession of a weapon by any student while the student is on school property or in attendance at a school function may also result in criminal prosecution. (FS 790.115)" (26)

It does not say shall...now go back to the 3 points I listed.

Those who have read my posts know that I was a middle school / high school principal for 5 years. Where the Hades is the common sense here?!?!?!? These people are fools!

Now, I am a graduate professor, instructing people who want to become administrators. These people would flunk my courses.

Doc2005

RobXD9
December 16, 2007, 08:29 PM
Texas Rifleman:Zero tolerance arguments aside, I'd want to know one thing.

Does the school furnish knives for students to cut food and if so, who cares if there's one more knife?

The stupidity of today's educators continues to astound me.


Good question. Here's an even better one...

What do the cafeteria staff use to make food for those kids? If they have any knives then they should be arrested as well. And if we're going down that road, if the principal knows that there are sharp knives in the cafeteria, then the principal should be arrested as well.

What ludicrous bullsnot to have a 10-year-old charged with a felony for this. Un-fricken-believable.

Another poster was right - removing "intent" from the equation sends us down a dangerous road.

Sir Aardvark
December 16, 2007, 08:50 PM
Hey everybody...

If you think this is bad, it's only going to get worse.

Every year the powers-that-be come up with even more inexplicable laws and regulations - if it weren't so serious it would be funny as hell.

And no... I'm not a pessimist - just a realist.

Sorry to point out the obvious.

gunsmith
December 16, 2007, 09:50 PM
I'm worried about all the other children getting felonies for the same stuff, the ones under the radar.

Also, yeah, what about food prep in the school? why are those folks not getting felonies?
Who supplied them with the assault kitchen knives?

Robert Hairless
December 16, 2007, 09:54 PM
Every year the powers-that-be come up with even more inexplicable laws and regulations - if it weren't so serious it would be funny as hell.

I think that it's the parents who want them.

IA_farmboy
December 16, 2007, 09:54 PM
So here is what you do if found in this situation, have EVERY student bring a steak knife to school to eat their lunch. It's called civil disobedience. What are they going to do? Expel every student for "policy violations"?

This student, if truly accused of a felony, is due a trial by peers. I suppose that means a jury box full of ten year old students. That brings about another possible resolution, jury nullification. A jury by peers would be difficult if it was preceded by a bout of civil disobedience as, I assume, someone accused of a crime cannot be put on jury duty.

This whole thing is full of nonsense.

Geno
December 16, 2007, 09:59 PM
Well, speaking as a former administrator, and a current graduate professor of educational leadership, I for one say it's time to raise some serious Hell on Washington, and on our individual states' "leader"-less fools.

I for one propose to vote-out any and all seated politicians who fail to repeal Zero Tolerance. Anyone want to kick in a couple of dollars to buy about 500 used suitcases? We could send each one of these political fools a suitcase, with a note that says:

Our children are not felons,
nor shall you render them so!

Repeal Zero Tolerance,
or pack this bag!

Seriously urinated-off!

Doc2005

MikePGS
December 16, 2007, 10:30 PM
That's a real good idea Doc. You can buy suitcases super cheap at the salvation army store by my house :D

Sistema1927
December 16, 2007, 10:46 PM
What have we become?

God help us.

ExSoldier
December 16, 2007, 10:53 PM
Last year one of the many CODE RED alerts we had in the inner city high school where I teach was a pair of students hunting each other with STEAK KNIVES. The rules are in place for a reason and as a person who sees those reasons every day I can only say that 99% of the population on this board has not CLUE ONE as to the mindset of folks who literally exist "where the rubber hits the road."

An example: If two students are fighting and it is a CLEAR case of aggression and defense (one student "JUMPS" another) BOTH students are still sent to outdoor suspension for ten days. On the surface, that is of course ridiculous. On the street a clear case of self defense is valid to protect yourself from prosecution by our court system. Especially with witnesses.

Conspiracy theorists (like me) might say it is a clear cut example of the system building into our society a sense of submission to authority under any and all circumstances. I think that maybe this is so. However, it's also the ONLY way it can work in a school environment. Just happens to work out like that.

Old Fuff
December 16, 2007, 11:09 PM
Last year one of the many CODE RED alerts we had in the inner city high school where I teach was a pair of students hunting each other with STEAK KNIVES. The rules are in place for a reason and as a person who sees those reasons every day I can only say that 99% of the population on this board has not CLUE ONE as to the mindset of folks who literally exist "where the rubber hits the road."

Yeah, we got a clue... The case in question involves a 10 year-old girl, using a knife to cut meat in her lunch, not a pair of inter-city high school punks apparently looking to cut up each other. We have a lemons v. apples situation here, but we - unlike some school administrators - can see the difference in age and intent. The "rules," as they are being enforced clearly show the complete incompetence of too many in the education establishment.

ExSoldier
December 16, 2007, 11:18 PM
Having said all of the above, let me also state with an equal amount of certitude, that the zero tolerance policy is STOOOOOPID!

I have a friend whose kid was almost expelled from school because in ART class the little guy made a model of a Glock 21 and fired it in the kiln. So happens that his parents are both NRA Instructors and they both happen to be IDPA competitors as is the kid himself! The two parents met and they were each the President of an IDPA Club. When the marriage happened, the two clubs merged as well. So the kid was literally raised in a home full of guns. The parents had to go into the school and fight to have the kid stay. They won but it was tough. Stuff like that is what sickens me. I also don't see it going away. Why? Well I got this e-mail the other day on the meaning of the term Political Correctness and it rings so true:

The following is the 2007 winning entry from an annual contest at Texas A&M University calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term. This year's term was Political Correctness. The winner wrote, "Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

ReadyontheRight
December 16, 2007, 11:30 PM
For those of you who advocate "she and her parents should have known the rules":

How in the heck do we stop stupid rules like this if we do not raise our voices when we finally notice a stupid rule when it's enforced?

"Well, I agree the rules are dumb, but them's the rules now, so we gotta all follow them..."

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Human beings use steak knives to eat steak. Maniacs use steak knives as weapons.

novaDAK
December 16, 2007, 11:30 PM
I wonder if a spife is legal? :rolleyes:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/42/109848273_d0e9fd17d6.jpg?v=0
Spife? Or evil assault spoon? No ordinary citizen should be able to own one of those...:eek::rolleyes::barf::mad:

IA_farmboy
December 16, 2007, 11:49 PM
Last year one of the many CODE RED alerts we had in the inner city high school where I teach was a pair of students hunting each other with STEAK KNIVES.

Had a student stabbed another with a sharpened pencil would you ban all pencils from the school? What if a student took a swing with a chair? Or a book? But we cannot ban books, chairs, and pencils from schools as student would not be able to learn. It is also quite difficult for students to eat a proper meal without proper utensils. I guess students could suck their meals through a straw.... until one student jabs another in the eye with a straw.

When people desire to cause harm to another they tend to take advantage of whatever is at hand to use as a tool to cause harm. The steak knife wasn't the problem, the students hunting each other was the problem. If they didn't have steak knives I would imagine sharpened pencils would have been used instead.

ReadyontheRight
December 17, 2007, 12:12 AM
...99% of the population on this board has not CLUE ONE as to the mindset of folks who literally exist "where the rubber hits the road."...

We all live in the "real world". My great-grandfather was killed by a freakin' shovel.

A "real world" where steak knives should be banned is also a world where baseball bats, cleats, big strong kids, rope, guns, electricity and gravity should also be banned.

How 'bout we PUNISH the murdering idiots who use the above tools/weapons instead of blaming the tool/weapon in the hands of someone trying to eat their lunch?

I am guessing that...hmmmmmm... 100%?!!! of the students of that school had steak knives available at all hours. Unlocked! In their kitchen at home. Probably also available at the unsecured kitchen at school. Very easy to put into a pocket or backpack 24/7.

But use it as designed to cut a nice tasty steak at lunch, and you are BUSTED!

Somehow we have raised a crop of baby boomers who love rules but hate both rule and common sense.

czhen
December 17, 2007, 12:26 AM
Zero tolerance OK
That will sound stupid but Ive seen many handy man working on schools with pocket knifes.

CZhen, Fl

.cheese.
December 17, 2007, 03:18 AM
I propose that a new topic be started in "Activism". The topic is: What we should do about this.

Also, any details on the type of knife? Perhaps I missed that.

Mannix
December 17, 2007, 03:59 AM
Conspiracy theorists (like me) might say it is a clear cut example of the system building into our society a sense of submission to authority under any and all circumstances. I think that maybe this is so. However, it's also the ONLY way it can work in a school environment. Just happens to work out like that.

Really? It seemed to work fine the other way around until about '75 when the powers that be seemed to decide that "feeling safe" was more important than personal freedom. I got railroaded just as described, some guy randomly(I hadn't ever even talked to him before) beat the snot out of me, and appearently blocking punches and blows to my face from his knees constituted "fighting back" which is just as bad.

Zero tolerance, in practice, is one mechanism among many used to brainwash children into the socialist way of thinking. I may sound kinda crazy, but think about it. All weapons are prohibited, defending oneself is prohibited, the only acceptable way to handle a problem is to go to the school authorities, you're subjected to random search and seizure, you aren't allowed to speak your mind, and you're forced to be there.

All in the name of order, safety and necessity. Pretty Orwellian if you ask me.

BobbyQuickdraw
December 17, 2007, 04:10 AM
When I was in school we were never told "No Knives." We were told "no pocket knives" at some point. And "No weapons" at some point.

But a knife for cutting food? We were provided with metal knives. Now a steak knife can be dangerous, but it was in her lunchbox or whatever and used for eating.

She wasn't pulling it out to show people. She should be punished at a school level (detention) and told not to do it again. She should not be a felon.

Anyone who thinks she should be subject to prosecution really needs to step back, take a look at their beliefs and take a look at the direction those beliefs will take America.

Punishing children severely for this, lawsuits for that, a complete lack of understanding. We're forcing ourselves in a dangerous direction that will only lead to heartbreak and violence.

cambeul41
December 17, 2007, 05:20 AM
If the girl is charged with a felony, it is time for jury nullification.

http://www.fija.org/

Geno
December 17, 2007, 05:53 AM
The case presented about the boys fighting with steak knives can not possibly be more distinct from the little girl cutting her food...unless of course the two were not fighting and were in fact cannibals.

Zero Tolerance can be appropriate as in the case that ExSolider presents of students fighting with weapons. Go back to the 3 points! I present them for a reason:

1. Item must constitute a weapon
2. Student must have knowingly brought the weapon
3. Student must have intent to cause great harm, damage, death, etc.

The steak knife fight meets all 3 criteria. The girl cutting her food does not. Should arrest people because they drive home after buying a 6-pack of beer. After all, the criteria are in place: car, driver, and beer. It makes as much sense.

Regarding the following statement, especially those that I have placed in blue, I don't even know where to begin. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. If all you have is Zero Tolerance, all children look like felons.

Conspiracy theorists (like me) might say it is a clear cut example of the system building into our society a sense of submission to authority under any and all circumstances. I think that maybe this is so. However, it's also the ONLY way it can work in a school environment. Just happens to work out like that.

Any educator who truly feels this, needs to enroll in the EDL 515 Executive Leadership and Decision-making course that I instruct. There are alternatives, but they al fall under common sense, and interpreting policies and procedure. Remember, if all you have is a hammer.

Doc2005

RustyShackelford
December 17, 2007, 06:13 AM
Before anymore THR.org members read this posting or contact any FL area school employees, stop for one minute and consider this;
Several months ago, two teenage boys got into a stupid fight over a young girl on a school bus next to the school. One young boy pulled a small pocket knife out and killed the other. :uhoh: It was a big mess in the local media(Orange County FL). The local Sheriff; Kevin Beary(a former NRA LEO of the year, ;)) made a big issue over kids not allowed to have ANY knives, edged weapons, etc! This is the reason why no children are allowed to "bring from home" anything that could injury or kill another student.
I know it may be harsh but fair is fair.
Rusty S

Geno
December 17, 2007, 06:31 AM
Rusty:

Apply the case of the 10-year-old girl to the 3 criteria of Zero Tolerance:

Waiting...

Doc2005

Old Fuff
December 17, 2007, 09:33 AM
:scrutiny:Doc is right on...

Criminals use guns and other weapons to hurt and even kill people. Therefore to stop this we should prohibit everybody from having guns or other weapons, right? Well no, but this is the zero tolerance solution.

What is different between armed criminals and (hopefully) the members of this forum is not ownership of weapons, but the intention toward how they should be used. The criminal uses weapons to take that which is not his or hers. Others use weapons to protect themselves from criminals.

Zero tolerance laws and policies remove consideration of intent. Further, they sometimes make an attacker and the victim equal when it comes to blame. There is no relationship between the intent of those illegally using weapons of any kind - such as the high school age boys cited in the above posts, and a 10 year-old girl using a knife to cut meat in her lunch.

If you see this otherwise it's time to turn in our kitchen knives - and guns.

gunsmith
December 17, 2007, 09:37 AM
can someone in FL get better numbers.

skidmark
December 17, 2007, 10:31 AM
they won't answer the phone

can someone in FL get better numbers.

Are they already on "Winter Holidays" break?

stay safe.

skidmark

GuyWithQuestions
December 17, 2007, 03:10 PM
The story doesn't include many details, which is usually the case when something in the media sounds stupid. Whether she kept it hidden in her lunch box until lunch or carried it around some other way would make a big difference in how to interpret the situation.

In this situation, I wouldn't have charged her with anything nor suspended her, just a simple warning would have done because it sounds like she had no bad intentions. Think of the last time when you accidentally forgot to turn on your headlights at night in an area that's extremely well lit and a police officer pulled you over and gave you a warning instead of a ticket. The same should have been done in a situation like this.

At the same time, I can understand why they would get all concerned about a situation like this. Earlier I was an assistant Scout Master for 11 year old Blazer scouts (between when they're cub scouts and real boy scouts). They got into so much mischief; why would I have given them steak knives to run around with on their spare time? At an over night scout camp, one boy poured boiling hot water on another kid and the other kid was crying. Every single rabbit that ran out had them shouting, running, and throwing rocks; although that was kind of a relief since it meant them leaving for a minute gave the scout master and I some peace and quite. I trusted them more when they were supervised, for example we had them target practice with rifles and I felt quite entertained and at ease. I probably wouldn't have minded showing them how to use a chainsaw (if that's even allowed in 11 year old scouting), but definitely not run around with them unsupervised in play. However, if it was a bunch of 10 year olds (one year younger) running around at an elementary school with steak knives, is that really a good idea? I have no problem with them using them to cut food, that's normal behavior. They should provide them for lunch. But really, running around with them in their backpacks, or whatever she was doing that they left the details out?

Sounds like their local area has interesting news stories. For example, they have "Police: Man Beat Boy For Polishing Nails". :rolleyes:

v35
December 17, 2007, 03:19 PM
Who's responsible for a child who chokes to death on a piece of food that can't be cut into small enough pieces to eat, for lack of a knife?

Brad Johnson
December 17, 2007, 03:22 PM
Marion County Schools
Administrative offices
512 SE 3 Street
Ocala, Florida 34471

Voice 352-671-7700
FRS 800-955-8770
TTY 800-955-8771

*NOTE*
No e-mail addresses were given on their contact pages (cowards). Listed e-mail addresses are presumptive based on the naming conventions for other school personnel.


Jim Yancey
Superintendent
jim.yancey@marion.k12.fl.us

Diana Greene
Deputy Superintendent
diana.greene@marion.k12.fl.us

Wally Wagoner
Deputy Superintendent
wally.wagoner@marion.k12.fl.us

Geno
December 17, 2007, 03:44 PM
GuyWithQuestions:

Nobody has said a 10-year-old should be walking around school with a knife. But, the polar-opposite of making the child a felon under ZT is not proper. The child violated policy and should have been dealt with as such. However, she did not violate the 3 criteria for ZT.

Doc2005

GuyWithQuestions
December 17, 2007, 04:33 PM
Doc2005,

I totally agree that it was inappropiate to make what she did a felony, I'm just thrown off because everyone's saying that she needs a stake knife, and some even compare this situation to gun control, which makes it sound like she had every right to bring a steak knife. I think they should provide them instead. It sounds like the real issue that the school was worried about was the fact that she was carrying one around at school, not the fact that she had a belief that she needs something to cut her food with and that that's irrational.

I don't think that she should have gotten in trouble, not even disciplined for violated school policy, a simple warning would have been better for the situation (unless she had been warned before).

LiquidTension
December 17, 2007, 04:35 PM
As I've said so many times before, there is absolutely no justification for any sort of zero tolerance policy.

If there is no zero tolerance policy, the guilty can still be punished and the innocent do not have to be punished. People seem to think that if there's no zero tolerance policy that the guilty will not suffer consequences and that just isn't true.

Geno
December 17, 2007, 04:35 PM
Excellent clarification of several points! Thank-you!

Doc2005

RustyShackelford
December 17, 2007, 07:56 PM
Howdy Doc;
Your wait is now over, if you want to research online the exact date and related details of the Orange County FL school murder of one 14yr old killing a classmate with a small pocketknife then check here; www.myfoxorlando.com or www.wesh.com or www.cfnews13.com or www.orlandosentinel.com .
These media sources detail my points that children on school property should not have knifes, throwing stars, edged weapons, swords or any other "weapons". If a school supervisor or LEO thinks an item is wrong or subject to enforcement then let them do the job. :rolleyes: We should not judge sworn LEOs or teachers then blame them when a major incident or criminal act goes on in a US school. ***?
Rusty S
:banghead:

Geno
December 17, 2007, 08:13 PM
Rusty:

Examples of other students' misdeeds are not relevant to the 10-year-old's case.

I am waiting for someone to apply the 10-year-old's case to the 3 criteria of ZT. It has not been done. As I said earlier, no, the student should not have had the knife in school. But, her possessing the knife is not in and of itself a zero tolerance justification either for expelling or for convicting...it is merely 1 of 3 needed, and for fact, the remaining two are not there. Ergo, the school should deal with the matter via the general rules in the handbook.

Doc2005

gunsmith
December 17, 2007, 08:18 PM
It kept me safe and allowed me to keep my lunch and my change.
One time the science teacher found one, he demonstrated his knife throwing skills by sticking it in the ceiling, he also beat up this 18 yr old who was still in the seventh grade, then did the same to his dad when his dad came in to complain.
If kids are getting killed, teach them to protect themselves, because it is already illegal to murder.

Geno
December 17, 2007, 08:29 PM
For anyone who thinks the child is being justly punished, I direct you to a recent ZT thread. I posted some detail of one student who is alive today because I refused to expel her under ZT! I've been around the education world for many years, 23 to be exact, and I can assure all, my convictions are based solidly in educational law, and in uncommon sense and they run to the core of my bones. When I say no, I by golly mean no expulsion! Check out post #28. Are you willing to risk getting fired to put your convictions to the fire's test?! I did, and as the result a young lady is alive. My reward is to be a full-time, tenure-track, graduate professor. Why? Because of my education, my experience and most of all because of my conviction to not allow students' needless conviction.

A recent ZT Thread:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=3824251&posted=1#post3824251

The 10-year-old did not violate ZT. Unfortunately, when it comes to Zero Tolerance, her administrators have Zero Spine. :D I need to return to grad school. It's time for me to get a law degree!!! Some educator, who possesses uncommon sense, needs to litigate these cases nation-wide and then hold the schools and politicians accountable.

Doc2005

TargetTerror
December 17, 2007, 09:01 PM
I posted some detail of one student who is alive today because I refused to expel her under ZT!

I looked at your post in the prior thread referencing this event. Can you provide further details? How did refusal by you to suspend the student directly save here life? :uhoh:

Doc, you also keep mentioning these 3 criteria for ZT. Where are these codified? Are they actually written into law? Are they simply school policies? And why should these 3 criteria apply in the case of this 10 year old girl, even if they applied at the school you used to work at?

Geno
December 17, 2007, 09:14 PM
The Student:

I can't detail too much because it is a child's record. I have to keep it in a nutshell. This child was, undiagnosed bi-polar. She got into a "fight" and it was no fight. The allegations grew and grew as to what she had done, most of it lies...weapon, no weapon. Hitting, no hitting. Seriously a pack of lies. Anyhow, the child hearing the lies feared being arrested, and suspended or expelled. She went home and very seriously tried to kill herself. Her psych called me at home and worked out a deal with me to withdraw the child from school, and to not pursue any action against the girl.

The parents of the other child pressed and pressed for action. I refused. So, they went to the Supt. The Supt refused and kicked it back to me. So the other parents went to the Board. It remained there for the remainder of the academic year. The Board Pres kept insisting that I take action, and I kept advising them that the psych said if we did, the child WOULD kill herself. I refused action, ergo, yes, the child is alive because I refused to take ZT action.

ZT:

When ZT was passed, it was up to each district to develop and adopt a ZT policy. The criteria were handed down and they constitute the legal framework. I have already detailed the criteria, and for those same criteria, I say, the student in Florida did not violate ZT. She violated school policy, yes. But, she did not violate the criteria for ZT as ZT was intended.

I hope this helps. I do have to temper what I detail, as I said, these are confidential records, and it really is not too hard to find my real name, back-track where I was employed and request Brd of Ed records. With that, the circle is closed and the child's privacy violated.

Here's are some links for you:

http://www.ippsr.msu.edu/Publications/PBZeroTolerance.pdf

http://www.ippsr.msu.edu/ppie/

http://www.thisistrue.com/zt.html

And why did it all matter?!?! Creeping incrementalism. Now, WE have Zero Tolerance:

http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=6936

Doc2005

CNYCacher
December 17, 2007, 09:24 PM
I am reminded of the quote: "Every normal man must, at times, be tempted to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."

jpr9954
December 17, 2007, 09:27 PM
Has anyone gotten a reply from the Principal or any of the other school administrators?

They may be stupid but not so stupid as to not know how to set up a "kill file" for email they don't want to read.

John

TargetTerror
December 17, 2007, 09:30 PM
Thanks for the links, Doc. I didn't realize ZT was a part of federal law! Thats REALLY bad.

Geno
December 17, 2007, 09:33 PM
We're next TargetTerror!!! We ARE next!!! It is already at Michigan's state level for all of us for driving!

Allow me to scar the Hades outta you all. Ya hear the one about the LEO whose wife wanted him to have to retire??? She spiked his food with pot. Years later, it was still detectable to a microscopic level...ZT...they fired this LEO!!! Everyone still like ZT?!

Doc2005

mekender
December 17, 2007, 09:55 PM
Doc, i too was a victim of ZT... back in HS, on a monday after a boy scout campout, a fillet knife fell out of my back pack in my anatomy-phys class... i was removed from school... was not arrested, probably because my father worked at the school... i was expelled for 6 months and forced to attend an "alternative" school... the same school that drug dealers and habitual violent kids were sent to... the rest of that year was a fight to stay alive... i spent countless days getting beat up, punched, kicked and generally abused by the other students... the fact that i was the only one there from a middle class background didnt matter to anyone other than the students, and they used that as a reason to beat on me... as far as the school system was concerned i was a criminal just like the rest...

so i can totally agree with your analysis on ZT... its a stupid rule, and its enforced by stupid narrow minded people...

Geno
December 17, 2007, 10:09 PM
mekender:

Your case also fails the ZT criteria:

1) a true weapon? Yes.
2) knowingly brought to school? No!!!
3) intended for use to kill or harm? No!!!

You did not violate ZT. But, you had spineless administrators! Sorry for that!

Did they give you a due process hearing?! Did they allow you to call witnesses? Did they hold off ALL action until you presented a defense? If not, they violated your equal protection too, substantive and procedural.

Doc2005

Lew
December 17, 2007, 10:25 PM
I'm afraid of dealing with this crap when I have children. I need to find a private school of THR types who know how to deal with things at the lowest level. Where they have common sense rules and a real curriculum. Do they exist?

Geno
December 17, 2007, 10:34 PM
Agreed, and yes they do exist. My child attends private school because I was a public school administrator. I saw the crap first-hand and had to fight it.

At private school, my daughter does reports about hunting, shooting, talks about her collection of dozens, and dozens of firearms.

A hint, start seeking a good private school 3 or so years in advance.

Doc2005

mekender
December 17, 2007, 11:07 PM
You did not violate ZT. But, you had spineless administrators! Sorry for that!

Did they give you a due process hearing?! Did they allow you to call witnesses? Did they hold off ALL action until you presented a defense? If not, they violated your equal protection too, substantive and procedural.

no they didnt do any of the above... this was in 1996, and im suspecting that my father went along with their recommendation because of him not wanting to risk his job... they didnt prosecute criminally, so its not on a permanent record anywhere...

hoppinglark
December 17, 2007, 11:08 PM
I graduated from High School in 1999 and back then there were no knives in the lunch room, only sporks.

Looks like we have become a nation of fools.

Robert Hairless
December 18, 2007, 01:16 AM
Why are kids today so different from those in generations before this one? Adults, especially parents, seem to be afraid of kids now.

Other generations guided their children into becoming trustworthy and responsible young people. This generation of adults behaves far differently. It works by extremes.

At one extreme parents seem to sentimentalize their own children beyond the bounds of reason, hovering over them so they can't possibly learn to stand on their own feet because they're never allowed opportunities to try, to fail, and to learn from their own failures.

At the other extreme adults behave as if they are in terror of children, fearful that they'll murder each other and everyone else, and terrified of trusting them. Something is very wrong with a society that must have Zero Tolerance Policies because nobody's judgment is good. And there's something especially wrong with it when kids aren't trusted with tableware, images, or forms of play common to all previous generations.

Not too long ago murderous children were considered the exception. It appears that they're considered the norm today and that all kids must be treated as potentially homicidal.

So what happened to the kids? Are they the result of an enormous genetic meltdown? Or is it that adults today are deranged?

I didn't grow up in a paranoid country and it wasn't paranoid while my children grew up to adulthood. What happened?

Titan6
December 18, 2007, 01:22 AM
Gee, Robert. Maybe they never grew up themselves.

Winchester 73
December 18, 2007, 01:22 AM
It all started to change on November 22,1963.
It's been all downhill from there.

Robert Hairless
December 18, 2007, 04:29 AM
Titan6 and Winchester 73, what do you mean?

What connection do you see with the Kennedy assassination? It was awful but this country has survived a great many worse traumas and become stronger for them.

Not arguing. Truly interested and curious. What I've seen in the relatively recent past is destructive and self destructive. And it must be horrible for children at the extremes and everywhere in between too. What a pathetic way to live and to raise kids.

I hope I'm not stepping on people's toes. It's just that I do remember my own childhood and parenting years with exceptional clarity and no sentimentality. There was good and there was bad, but there was nothing at all like what I've observed these past several years. I'm puzzled and disturbed.

Does anyone else feel that way?

JaxNovice
December 18, 2007, 05:05 AM
It really is too bad that the school intentionally hid this rule from this one student. It must have been quite difficult to accomplish.

She broke a rule and suffered the consequence. Her parents should be punished for being stupid as well.

Robert Hairless
December 18, 2007, 05:54 AM
Deleted by poster

Double Naught Spy
December 18, 2007, 06:20 AM
Florida: Student arrested for cutting food with knife

For the life of me, I don't understand how people can show such a lack of comprehension about cause and effect. The student was not arrested for cutting food with a knife. The act of cutting food with a knife is not an illegal act. The student was arrested on a weapons charge (stupid as it may be). It was the act of cutting food with the knife that got the attention of school officials, but that was not what the student was arrested for.

Geno
December 18, 2007, 08:04 AM
Finally the story has been picked up by Fox News...

Doc2005

Creature
December 18, 2007, 10:44 AM
Double Naught Spy wrote:

For the life of me, I don't understand how people can show such a lack of comprehension about cause and effect. The student was not arrested for cutting food with a knife. The act of cutting food with a knife is not an illegal act. The student was arrested on a weapons charge (stupid as it may be). It was the act of cutting food with the knife that got the attention of school officials, but that was not what the student was arrested for.

Exactly. Thanks for saying what apparently nobody else is willing to understand.

Geno
December 18, 2007, 11:03 AM
DNS said:

For the life of me, I don't understand how people can show such a lack of comprehension about cause and effect. The student was not arrested for cutting food with a knife. The act of cutting food with a knife is not an illegal act. The student was arrested on a weapons charge (stupid as it may be). It was the act of cutting food with the knife that got the attention of school officials, but that was not what the student was arrested for.

Close but no cigar. She violated criterion 1, possibly criterion 2, but not criterion 3. Inasmuch as not all 3 criteria were violated, the ZT law should NOT have kicked in. She violated a school policy which was force-adopted by No Child Left Behind.

What kills me is the DA law has resulted in leaving a Hades-of-a-lot of children not only behind, but felons.

Remember, folks...It's for the children!!!

Doc2005

BridgeWalker
December 18, 2007, 12:37 PM
At one extreme parents seem to sentimentalize their own children beyond the bounds of reason, hovering over them so they can't possibly learn to stand on their own feet because they're never allowed opportunities to try, to fail, and to learn from their own failures.

Except that parents can't fix the problem. Parents can't let thier child tote around a first knife (which invariably includes the inevitable first knife cut), because of rules like the one at issue.

Parents have to be wary of letting their child learn about guns, lest the child mention it at school, before they develop the discretion to know when to not talk about it.

Heck, I get random strangers yelling at me for letting my daughter go about barefoot in the summer, for not forcing her to keep her hat on in the winter, for not swooping in an saving her when she gets in a fight over a toy with another child, for letting her climb the tall ladder to a slide at the playground, for even letting her get more than three feet away from me when she is playing at the playground. The censure that is levied upon parents and children who take risks is huge.

A CPS worker told a neighbor a couple of years ago that *all* burns incurred by children are abuse or neglect, that there is no such thing as an accidental burn. Strange, because when I was five, I remember disobeyig my parents, climbing up on the counter to get a snack from the cupboard, and getting second and third degree burns over the palm of my hand. Apparently that was child abuse. I thought it was just accidental.

I've had friends tell me that it's such a shame that kids can't play outside alone anymore--nowadays it is too dangerous. The only danger that exists now that did not exist twenty or forty or a hundred years ago is that of governmental interference for neglect. Friends have had police called by neighbors reporting neglect because children were playing outdoors alone, with the mother watching from the kitchen window. The mother was warned by the cops that that is neglect and she needs to be more careful.

No, this is not just parents. This is living in a culture of fear, where I am reckless beyond reason for not having a cellphone and where eight inches of snow in Michigan is a disaster. Where high school kids experimenting with exlosives is terrorism, and where there are no accidents--bad things are the parents fault, and kids learn by obeying *always* everyone in authority and may never do things alone, because *everything* requires supervision. "Safety first" works well for guns. It works less well for playgrounds. Sometimes adventure and fun and learning need to come first. Not anymore though.

Geno
December 18, 2007, 12:42 PM
delta9:

By golly that is a great post!!! The points you make point to and affirm the need to allow children to play, to learn and to grow. It seems to me that the Nanny State is trying to raise our children. That has brought the crazies out of the woodwork to the point that they feel they have the right to tell others how to raise their children.

Seems to me that your own post could be summed up as to hint, "Let's let children be children?" I like that!!! Thank-you for that uncommon sense!

Geno

brighamr
December 18, 2007, 12:59 PM
Someone please call the local PD and ask them to inspect the teacher's lounge, cafe or whatever they call it now-adays.... I will bet $100 there is a knife in the teacher's eating place. Why aren't all of those teachers using "weapons" on their meals charged as felons? As long as everyone's hysterical, aren't scissors just "two weapons held together by a pin, highly usefull in stabbing and mauling". Last I heard, schools have a lot of scissors on campus, so where does the "useful tool" and "felony weapon" line exist?

BTW - any 10 year old with good sense will cut their food before eating it. More children die from choking each year than from a 10 year old knife attack... No I don't have a cite for this, it's just common sense.

Robert Hairless
December 18, 2007, 01:56 PM
Delta9, I understand that parents and kids have things rough today. I said it. What I wondered is if anyone had an insight into whether things are rough today because kids and/or parents are different today and need to have things rough.

For what it's worth, in another thread a few days ago some people argued adamantly that if a gun was stolen it was prima facie evidence that its owner was negligent in preventing the theft and should be prosecuted for any crimes committed with it. The stimulus was teenagers who shoot other people and then themselves. The people arguing for a law to punish those gun owners were also gun owners, but they sounded like Mayor Michael Bloomberg to me.

This is vicarious responsibility gone wild and a society in which ordinary people--like school principals, teachers, social workers, parents, high school and college kids, and a heck of a lot of people of all kinds who post messages in Internet gun forums--are infatuated with The Rules and want to punish everybody if possible. Including little kids if they can get at them.

Nobody seems able, or interested, to look beyond the rules. What's going on today? Is it possible that everyone has fallen off the edge and finds satisfaction in punishment. Doesn't anyone else see everyone getting hurt and wonder whether people have changed so much.

Old Fuff
December 18, 2007, 05:28 PM
I am reminded that this nation came into being in 1776, because of a group of men that refused to give unquestioned obedience to authority - its rules, regulations, and even laws. Quite the contrary, they believed in a government that was subservient to the people, and not the other way around. Also their view of government did not include bliss-nannyism and its constant intruding into people’s private affairs. I think that if they and foreseen zero tolerance we would have had an 11th amendment in the original Bill of Rights.

mekender
December 18, 2007, 05:47 PM
For the life of me, I don't understand how people can show such a lack of comprehension about cause and effect. The student was not arrested for cutting food with a knife. The act of cutting food with a knife is not an illegal act. The student was arrested on a weapons charge (stupid as it may be). It was the act of cutting food with the knife that got the attention of school officials, but that was not what the student was arrested for.

from dictionary.com

weap·on (wěp'ən)
n.

1. An instrument of attack or defense in combat, as a gun, missile, or sword.
2. Zoology A part or organ, such as a claw or stinger, used by an animal in attack or defense.
3. A means used to defend against or defeat another:

at what point did she engage in combat or aggressive measures that resulted in her tool (a steak knife) becoming a weapon?

knife, pencil, rock, chair, scissors, white out (poison), baseballs, bats, forks etc... all CAN be used as a weapon... but until they ARE used as a weapon, they are simply tools... she was never in possession of a weapon... she was in possession of a tool that was misinterpreted by people that think that they know more than a 10 year old... obviously they must... im sure the school is being praised for being astute and removing a danger from the school, while the 10 year old is sitting at home wondering what she did wrong...

joab
December 18, 2007, 07:22 PM
Any knife is listed in the school policy book as a weapon
That makes her knife a weapon
Trying to change that fact with semantic arguments does not make it less of a weapon
Some of those other items you list are also on the schools list of potential weapons
while the 10 year old is sitting at home wondering what she did wrong..
The school policy had to be signed by the parents of the student or by the student themselves signifying that they had read and accepted those rules
All she has to do is read it to have that question answered

Geno
December 18, 2007, 07:28 PM
Joab:

You're missing trhe point of ZT. She had a knife which can be called a legitimate weapon. She knew that she brought the knife. But, she did not bring with with intent to harm or kill. In light of the 3rd point, TZ does NOT kick-in. That is the legal standard.

Ergo, she broke the school policy but she did not violate ZT. See the difference?

The other matter here, and this will likely offend some, but this is the way schools work. The police do not run the schools!! I repeat...the police do NOT run the schools!!! In fact, the police can not and had better not step a toe into school property to speak to a student unless the parents have been contacted! Even at that, I hold legal controlling authority to say no...not here...not now. I personally have escorted my share of state police officers to the property line with impolite orders to never return without a warrent!

When I was the principal, I ran the school...no one else...period! The children are minors, not adults! They have legal rights and someone needs taking to the woodshed over this child's case. The problem with current school administrators is that they do not understand school law. A second problem is that many administrators are too spineless to defend children.

If a genuine crime has been committed, such as a ZT violation (meaning that the student brought a weapon to kill or harm) that is when the administrative team should call the police for crimial charges.

Doc2005

Geno
December 18, 2007, 08:19 PM
Let me offer up an even more perverse misuse of educational law and abuse of the police. In about 1995, a law was passed Re: students smoking. Instead of suspending a child, administrator could opt to call the police and have the student issued a ticket which carried a $50.00 fine. I mean to tell you...the nanny state started several years back...transfer education to legal control. The police officers about went nuts over this. They are trying to solve murders, and principals were calling them to write smoking tickets?! These recent laws associated with NCLB, and the case of this student, are just dumb.

Doc2005

Winchester 73
December 18, 2007, 10:07 PM
Robert Hairless,
Its seems to me our whole mindset about weapons began to change after John Kennedy's 1963 assasination.
Before that most high schools had gun clubs on campus. Students in NYC carried rifles and shotguns openly on subways and buses with nary a remark much less the police being called.14 year olds in small town American hardware stores could go in and purchase a .22 rifle with no problem whatsoever.It was normal,it was done everyday and there were no school,work place, shopping area,post office shootings to speak of.
Then everything changed.JFK in Dallas,Malcolm X in NYC, the Texas Tower in Austin,MLK in Memphis,Bobby in L.A.,George Wallace in MD,2 failed attempts on Gerald Ford in 1975,Reagan in 1981 in DC.
And all the mass killings at McDonalds,Luby's through all the 1990's school shooting's ,climaxing at Columbine in 1999 into this century.
It just seems to me that Lee Harvey Oswald's massive obscenity that day unleashed some previously shackled demons to begin preying on American society.And those forces continue their maniacal,insane,insensible depredations up to this very day.
And in concert ,beginning with the GCA OF 1968 and then 1986 and 1993 our firearms freedoms began to slide down that slippery slope until today we have over 22,000 worthless,ineffective ,gun control laws on the books.
I really believe this mainly began that horrible day in Dallas.
But then again, perhaps like poster Nolo's signature line,"Maybe I'm just insane."

Koos Custodiet
December 18, 2007, 10:18 PM
How many of you guys know about Randy Cassingham's excellent This Is True? He writes about ZT a lot, and also picks up the cases where sane people have ZT towards ZT, and the appropriate people get... recalibrated... about this kinda nonsense.

http://www.thisistrue.com/

Edit : What Delta9 said.

Owens
December 18, 2007, 10:51 PM
I don't have children in school anymore, however, I do have some grandkids that are and some that will be in the future, although not in the town I live in. After reading several of the threads dealing with such issues, my approach would not be very THR in the Super's office.

It seems that at some point, good sense has got to kick in or there will be some very ugly ramifications.

Realistically, how is this over-zealous application of ZT reigned in? Just asking.

Geno
December 18, 2007, 11:15 PM
Owens:

You have to do it proactively. Seek an audience with the school board and have them detail the policy and procedures. Have them detail the protections to substantive and procedural due process. If these do not exist, or if the policy is tainted, challenge it. The single best defense is to be aware of the process of requesting any and all disciplinary action being stayed until after the appeal process is exhausted! Exhausted.

If your Brd of Ed is imprudent, replace them, and run for the Brd.

Doc2005

PedalBiker
December 18, 2007, 11:15 PM
Doc, i too was a victim of ZT... back in HS, on a monday after a boy scout campout, a fillet knife fell out of my back pack in my anatomy-phys class... i was removed from school... was not arrested, probably because my father worked at the school... i was expelled for 6 months and forced to attend an "alternative" school... the same school that drug dealers and habitual violent kids were sent to... the rest of that year was a fight to stay alive... i spent countless days getting beat up, punched, kicked and generally abused by the other students... the fact that i was the only one there from a middle class background didnt matter to anyone other than the students, and they used that as a reason to beat on me... as far as the school system was concerned i was a criminal just like the rest...

That's just like the story my wife tells about her school "bussing" experience. She was subjected to sexual harassment and forced to walk home alone one day when she missed the bus.

It's amazing how little the administrators actually care for the students and how deeply they love their rules.

As long as schools have baseball teams they can't say squat about steak knives. And don't get me started on bus drivers. I ride a bike after all.

Geno
December 18, 2007, 11:20 PM
PedalBiker:

I know; I have seen it!.. I was the Vice-president, then President of the MASSP for our Region. I was the one trying to get administrators to be proactive, involve the parents, etc. More than once I sat in meeting with students and talked to brick walls, with teachers, bus drivers, administrators, Board Members...you name it. Uncommon sense. Local control is the key. NCLB, and the associated laws, need to be dropped. They collectively are destroying our children's lives.

I am surprized that nobody has hit the fact yet that the NCLB and ZT laws are unconstitutional...and they are! They constitute a collective of non-funded federal mandates...Federalism.

Doc2005

Owens
December 18, 2007, 11:35 PM
Doc2005,

That is just what I have felt all along about this type of ZT 'garbage'. Guess I was trying to prod a few other folks to take an active role too.

To add, I haven't heard of any 'events' here locally though. Either they haven't occurred or they are real good at keeping it quiet.

Geno
December 18, 2007, 11:45 PM
Owens:

If ever your grandkids have troubles, PM me immediately. I'll help pass you you some "posterior-beating sticks".

You can't go wrong with picking up a Grad School Ed Law text and reviewing it. They cover a VERY wide body of info. Then, proactively seek-out the handbooks and policy and procedures from the Brd. Finally, get to know the administrative team. Attend the Brd of Education meetings. Get yourself onto some committees...especially the Handbook Review Committee.

Geno

Robert Hairless
December 18, 2007, 11:45 PM
joab:

Any knife is listed in the school policy book as a weapon
That makes her knife a weapon
Trying to change that fact with semantic arguments does not make it less of a weapon

It's certainly arguable that policy should take precedence over good judgment and common sense, and I am persuaded by the arguments here that this instance is one in which it is in the public interest to do so. This 10-year-old child has flagrantly violated both school policy and Florida law. She must be punished severely and held up as an example for all other children in Florida.

As you say so clearly and accurately, because the school policy book makes any knife a weapon it is a weapon. I agree. Florida law makes it a felony for anyone to bring any weapon into a school. There is no exemption for 10-year-olds or even for 2-year-olds who smuggle a toy knife in their diapers. The 10-year-old girl therefore should be arrested, charged, and tried as a felon. The jury in this case should be instructed in a way that leads to her conviction. The crime she committed is a Third Degree Felony under Florida law, with a sentence of up to 10 years in prison. Because she and her parents must have known the school policy, her offense was willful and she should be required to serve the full term of that sentence. Of course she will have lost her right to vote and to own or possess firearms for the rest of her life, and she will find it difficult to obtain employment. It will be impossible for her to have a job that requires a bond as long as she lives.

There probably are additional charges that can--and should--be brought against her. The persecutor should consider if it is possible to charge her additionally with at least one count of possessing the weapon on a school bus and another count of possessing the weapon at a school bus stop. Those too are felonies of the third degree, which would allow sentencing her to 10 additional years for each of those counts. The 10-year-old girl should be kept in prison for the full 30 years. If so, she should not be freed until she is forty years old. (A 2-year-old caught with a toy knife in his diaper could possibly be imprisoned until he is 32-years-old, which is as it should be.)

Serves her right. She violated school policy and Florida law. If she can't do the time she shouldn't have done the crime. Her trial and sentencing should serve as a deterrent to any other 10-year-old who brings a knife into a school for the purpose of cutting food. They should not have food in school that requires cutting, and if they bring such food into the school they should learn to bite it to pieces like every other little animal. These are schools, after all, where we educate our young in the ways we wish them to follow.

790.115 Possessing or discharging weapons or firearms at a school-sponsored event or on school property prohibited; penalties; exceptions.--

(1) A person who exhibits any sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, destructive device, or other weapon, including a razor blade, box cutter, or knife, except as authorized in support of school-sanctioned activities, in the presence of one or more persons in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner and not in lawful self-defense, at a school-sponsored event or on the grounds or facilities of any school, school bus, or school bus stop, or within 1,000 feet of the real property that comprises a public or private elementary school, middle school, or secondary school, during school hours or during the time of a sanctioned school activity, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This subsection does not apply to the exhibition of a firearm or weapon on private real property within 1,000 feet of a school by the owner of such property or by a person whose presence on such property has been authorized, licensed, or invited by the owner.

(2)(a) A person shall not possess any firearm, electric weapon or device, destructive device, or other weapon, including a razor blade, box cutter, or knife, except as authorized in support of school-sanctioned activities, at a school-sponsored event or on the property of any school, school bus, or school bus stop; however, a person may carry a firearm:

1. In a case to a firearms program, class or function which has been approved in advance by the principal or chief administrative officer of the school as a program or class to which firearms could be carried;

2. In a case to a vocational school having a firearms training range; or

3. In a vehicle pursuant to s. 790.25(5); except that school districts may adopt written and published policies that waive the exception in this subparagraph for purposes of student and campus parking privileges.

For the purposes of this section, "school" means any preschool, elementary school, middle school, junior high school, secondary school, vocational school, or postsecondary school, whether public or nonpublic.

(b) A person who willfully and knowingly possesses any electric weapon or device, destructive device, or other weapon, including a razor blade, box cutter, or knife, except as authorized in support of school-sanctioned activities, in violation of this subsection commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Old Fuff
December 18, 2007, 11:51 PM
You is a hard man, Robert... Hard... :rolleyes:

Geno
December 19, 2007, 12:00 AM
Robert:

To the point: the child did not violate the ZT criteria. Ergo, the handbook which links to the law mandated by the ZT, has not been properly applied. It is as foolish to charge the child with attempted murder, as to charge her with a ZT violation. Both are equally lacking of legitimate connection from cause to effect.

You may continue to post the laws, the connection to which does not exist...the 3 criteria. It will not change the fact that the child did not actuate all 3 criteria to ZT.

Present for me, the activation via the handbook of the 3 criteria. If you can show me the 3 criteria violated, then and only then will you have a legitimate violation of ZT. I have requested it too many times...don't post me any more laws...post for me the 3 criteria and the violations.

Fact is you can not; the school can not. The police can not. Why? They do not exist.

Doc2005

Robert Hairless
December 19, 2007, 12:08 AM
Old Fuff:

You is a hard man, Robert... Hard...

Nah, like Joab and others here I think it's good to enforce every law, and the more laws the better.

Society punishes people for child abuse, presumably so that society can reserve for its self the right to abuse children.

Remember: It takes a village to destroy a child.

Doc2005:

Sigh. As usual you bog down in petty details such as whether the 10-year-old actually did violate the policy and the law. Stop being such a stick in the mud. Help destroy her life. There are many other lives that can be destroyed too. So many children, so little time.

*****

Even to call this exercise in viscious stupidity a "case" is to dignify it beyond all reason. As I said earlier in messages here, this generation seems to have lost its way. Idiocy of the kind that is the core of this discussion can be juggled semantically but in the end it is nothing more than idiocy.

Geno
December 19, 2007, 12:10 AM
Robert!!! You reeeeeeeally had me going there!!!!! :)

Doc2005

jmr40
December 19, 2007, 01:45 AM
I've taught for 28 years and do not know a single teacher that agrees with the zero tolerance law as written. If I understand the facts in this case the girl sat down in the cafeteria and started eating with the knife. Every kid in the school knew she had a knife at school and the school had to do something. If not, every gangster in the system would start carrying steak knives and claim they were for lunch.

If the knife were discovered before the girl got to the cafeteria things would have played out differently in my school. But under the circumstances the schools hands were tied.

Whether or not she is prosecuted will be up to law enforcement. At this time it is out of the schools hands. Based on my experiences, I seriously doubt that she will be prosecuted. From the reports I have read it sounds like she will get 10 days suspension. Probably the minimum for this type of infraction based on school board policy.

Geno
December 19, 2007, 08:37 AM
Just on Fox News...the School Board is "...reviewing its ZT policy..." Well, freakin' lahdidah! It's a little too late to be proactive board members!!! The local community needs to ban together and repeal the board.

Stupid is as stupid does!

Doc2005

joab
December 19, 2007, 08:56 AM
Nah, like Joab and others here I think it's good to enforce every law, and the more laws the better. But I see you see no need to practice reading comprehension or is it just another of your "tell a lie enough and it becomes truth" campaigns
My thoughts on this situation are fully explained in my first post here, but as usual you are too busy being cute to actually bother to read it

The girl knew or should have known of the rule against knives in school
I wont put the responsibility of knowing the state law on her, but it certainly torpedoes Docs three step theory

As has been adequately shown
Knives are against school policy and Florida law

Therefore this poor little girl is not sitting at home wondering what she did wrong
if she is then maybe special-ed should be in her future
she's sitting at home trying to figure out how to get out of the trouble she brought to herself

Geno
December 19, 2007, 09:09 AM
Let me make a clear point: I have zero problems with zero tolerance where properly applied.

Let me give a good ZT example:

1) Student A brings a knife (a genuine weapon)
2) Student A knowlingly (intentionally) brought the knife (a genuine weapon)
3) Student A was intent on causing great harm or murder

In that case, offer the punk up on a platter!!

Contrasting, bad ZT example (real case):

1) Student B brought a box cutter (a genuine weapon)
2) Student B did NOT knowlingly (intentionally) bring the box cutter (a genuine weapon). When she discovered her work-required box cutter, she gave it to the school officials.
3) Student B was NOT intent on causing great harm or murder

In that case, the student should have suffered no ZT reprisal. She was expelled. She was in line to be the school Val or Sal. She had never had a discipline issue. At 11th grade, she was history.

Doc2005

joab
December 19, 2007, 09:45 AM
And the real case we are discussing here deals with a student who knowingly brought a knife to school in violation of school policy and state law

AS I HAVE SAID RICHARD
I don't agree with the policy or the enforcement, but the girl is not totally innocent here either, now is she

Old Fuff
December 19, 2007, 09:56 AM
Excellent examples!!

Zero Tolerance makes no distinction between the two. A rule is a rule, regardless of circumstances. Rules (or laws) must be enforced, and if a young person’s future is destroyed so be it. Individuals are of no importance. Intent and motives are meaningless. Fairness doesn’t matter. Only the rule matters.

This concept runs counter to just about everything this country has ever stood for. The founding fathers would… :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf:

Geno
December 19, 2007, 10:07 AM
Old Fuff:

You are correct. Furthermore, when ZT was ordered, it was NOT intended to be applied this way.

I worked as an administrator with ZT for years...I never had to put a child out for ZT.

Specifically, the girl in this case, FL 10-year-old, violated the school no weapons policy but no the ZT. I present as evidence the school board has finally extracted the craniums from the posteriors and are "reactively" assessing their district's ZT policy.

A little too late.

Doc2005

Deanimator
December 19, 2007, 10:08 AM
Individuals are of no importance. Intent and motives are meaningless. Fairness doesn’t matter. Only the rule matters.

Yeah, but it gives passive aggressive cowards a victim who can't really fight back and who probably won't actually come after them with a real weapon.

Owens
December 19, 2007, 10:19 AM
Just because, I went back and re-read through this thread. Noticed (again?) that this is a prime case that ZT should not apply.

1. Item must constitute a weapon By the schools definition, it did.
2. Student must have knowingly brought the weapon yep.. again based on the schools definition of 'weapon' (Personally, I don't see anything as a weapon until it is used as such.)
3. Student must have intent to cause great harm, damage, death, etc. this is where ZT goes out the window. Was brought several times in the past. Her lack of aggression on the other instances, proves there was no intent. That is also where GOOD SENSE was supposed to kick in, and there in lies the REAl problem

Geno
December 19, 2007, 10:21 AM
Owens wins!!!!!!!!! Praise the Lord!!!!!!!!!!!

Geno passes Owens a virtual cigar!!!!!!!!!!!!

<<Geno does hand-springs>>

joab
December 19, 2007, 10:23 AM
So if she had brought a gun just to show her BFFs then there would have been no violation of ZT?

Buttermilk
December 19, 2007, 10:29 AM
I agree with much of what has been said. The 11/22/63 reference and several of the guys posts have really heartened me.
It's the Dr. Spock mindset also. This scourge was put upon our nation and has ruined people and progressively gotten worse. It has caused the demise of the human animal and the proliferation of political correctness and the over-achievers in sensitivity training and "feel good" philosophies have removed all semblance of common sense and good judgement.
When we have CPS employees who drive down streets and call for back-up on the police radio to remove children from 3 families because the kids were gathered in a front yard playing and were drinking from a water hose, this is really out of line AS IS THIS KNIFE CASE!!
Robert, Doc and Fuff-YA DONE GOOD!!!!!!

Geno
December 19, 2007, 10:31 AM
joab:

Glad you asked (this is a real case I dealt with this one...this is a real-life example as executed under ZT by yours truly):

1) Student drives Dad's car to school. Dad did NOT remove his 870 after pheasant hunting. (A genuine weapon)
2) Student did not know the shotgun was in the trunk.
3) Student had no intent to harm or kill.

Dad came to get the shotgun and had no idea the kid had driven the car. By golly...thank goodness I had good relationships with the parents and the kids.

No ZT foul.

Doc2005

Owens
December 19, 2007, 10:33 AM
Doc2005,

Thanks Geno! <<Lights up>>

joab
December 19, 2007, 10:39 AM
Doc2005
That case does not even come close to this one

As you say the student did not even know the gun was in a car that was not even his

I asked a specific question that parallels the case we are talking about

What if she had KNOWINGLY brought a gun to school but had no intentions of hurting anyone

Just to show her friends or was going to go shooting after school and wouldn't be able to go home first, or simply felt that the rules did not apply to her and she wanted to carry a gun to school for what ever reason

Has she violated ZT ?
Simple question really

Geno
December 19, 2007, 10:46 AM
It would not meet the ZT 3 criteria, per lacking #3, but it would be:

1) a Federal Firearms violation as well as
2) a violation of a minor in possession of a pistol

That's a whole different case, but TZ violation? No. It would be far more serious a violation. In that case prosecution should go forward.

Doc2005

joab
December 19, 2007, 10:48 AM
So how is it different to be in possession of a knife on school grounds which is against Florida sate law

Isn't the main point of contention here the arrest of the child by the state?

Geno
December 19, 2007, 10:51 AM
I already covered exactly that matter last evening in a post...there is a disconnect between the ZT initiating the prosecution. I suspect that if / when you contact a Fl legislator and ask as to the spirit and intent of the law, they will say this would be an abuse of the law.

joab
December 19, 2007, 11:02 AM
The girl knowingly brought what she knew or should have known to be contraband onto campus in violation of signed for school policy and codified sate law

Do you disagree?

Old Fuff
December 19, 2007, 11:02 AM
In each of the cited cases, the circumstances and intent should be considered, and whatever action taken based on these factors.

Lets say an individual is stopped for speeding and the officer discovers that the driver is transporting a seriously injured person to a nearby hospital

What should the officer do? If the driver is cited what should the court do? Would it be better to obey the speed limit even if doing so might cost someone their life? Zero Tolerance applied here would say "yes"

Would that be right or wrong?

joab
December 19, 2007, 11:05 AM
Is cutting her meat with a knife instead of a spoon a matter of medical necessity?

Doe the good of a clean knife cut over a spoon smush cut mitigate the violation of the law?

Shadowangel
December 19, 2007, 11:18 AM
Ridiculous. I'm going to have a kid in the next few years, and this stuff really bothers me. How do you teach your child to ignore the individualism-crushing effects of school, but retain the knowledge? How can I tell my kid that guns are fine and the teachers are wrong, then expect him/her to listen to other things the teacher says? Very frustrating.

Mannix
December 19, 2007, 11:20 AM
Ok, here's what SHOULD have happened, had the staff had any common sense:



Girl sits quietly cutting her food with steak knife.

Staff member sees it.

Staff member comes up to the girl and calmly tells her that it's against the rules, and takes the knife from her(while trying not making a scene).

Staff member brings it to the principle.

The principle calls her parents and asks to have a little chat face to face.

At said meeting, the principle goes over the rules with the parents(calmly), brings up that it isn't the first time, and asks them to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Parents have a little talk with the kid at home about why she shouldn't bring knives to school.

Everyone gets over it and moves on with their lives.



Now WHY can't people just do what makes sense, instead of being all reactionary about it. Jesus, it's a 10 year old, kids are stupid sometimes, and make mistakes. It's part of being a kid, you make a mistake, you get corrected, you don't make the same mistake again. No harm, no foul, everyone gets over it.

joab
December 19, 2007, 11:29 AM
How do you teach your child to ignore the individualism-crushing effects of school, but retain the knowledge? You teach her that there are different rules for different places, and it's going to be that way for the rest of her life just as it has been for all of our lives and our parents lives
You also teach her that her word is not to be taken lightly, if she signs or otherwise agree to certain conditions she is honor bound to live by those conditions

If you don't like the rules of a particular place don't go thee or work for change

In a perfect or even reasonable world you would be right mannix
But we live in neither and schools do not even try to pretend that they are

These are not super secret or made up on the spot rules
They are conditions that were agreed to prior to the girl attending school

Geno
December 19, 2007, 11:47 AM
Mannix:

What you described precisely what the original ZT outline proposed to do. Spineless adminis"traitors" ended that practice. Fortunately, there are still some good administrators out there. :)

Doc2005

AZRickD
December 19, 2007, 03:15 PM
Joab,

The antis don't want "different rules for different places" no more than they just wanted to stop their activism with no-smoking sections in planes or restaurants. They want it all. They want these rules to apply in vastly more places than you would care to admit.

To ignore the logic of Doc's ZT Three Points (tm) an administrator would have to be both irrational and thuggish.

But that's really not the case, is it, given the true intentions of the arrogant, left-leaning administrator.

My primary point is that rationality is not the point of Zero-Tolerance policies. It is political. School administrators wish to control us through our children. Are guns your hobby? Better not allow your child to draw a picture of you in your IDPA match for art class. Of course, the child (and you) should have known that was against the rules, so it's off to the psychologist to make sure she (and you) are not a threat. The turmoil involved in that psychic rectal exam, they hope, might be another straw in the camel's back. Shooting and hunting are just too much of a hassle now with rules upon rules upon laws upon laws upon bad people with forms and clip boards who happen to be backed by anti-gun (and anti-liberty, generally) administrators, school board presidents, prosecutors, judges and voir dere dumb-downed juries.

learn2shoot
December 19, 2007, 03:22 PM
I disagree with Mannix...

Here is what actually should have happened...

1. Girl is cutting steak
2. Teacher/staff member see steak being cut; thus the knife is not a threat to those who are not the steak
3. Girl finishes steak; wipes off knife
4. Girl puts knife back in bag; goes home and puts in dish washer

Deanimator
December 19, 2007, 03:56 PM
I disagree with Mannix...

Here is what actually should have happened...

1. Girl is cutting steak
2. Teacher/staff member see steak being cut; thus the knife is not a threat to those who are not the steak
3. Girl finishes steak; wipes off knife
4. Girl puts knife back in bag; goes home and puts in dish washer

But how does that infantilize the population as a whole?

Actually, if you really want to have fun with this, DEMAND that a school administrator be available with an appropriate implement to cut the food of any student who demands it. Since knives are prohibited, insist that a soup ladle or whisk be used. Protest loudly, engage the media and threaten to sue if the school doesn't cut the students' food for them.

The best way to deal with an idiot is to treat them like one.

Liko81
December 19, 2007, 03:57 PM
The girl knowingly brought what she knew or should have known to be contraband onto campus in violation of signed for school policy and codified sate law

Do you disagree?


No. Nobody disagrees that the child broke a written law. However, the law is unjust and should be repealed or rethought. "Zero Tolerance" policies do not take into account intent or degree of infraction. A similar case involved a child building their own PB&J and being suspended for the plastic knife that the mother packed in the lunchbox. No appeal, no consideration of circumstances; the child is sent home for two days.

A knife is a tool; what makes it a "weapon" is intended use. This can be inferred from design, potential for misuse, etc. This was a steak knife; I would agree that a steak knife's meat-cutting design translates very well to cutting living flesh as well as dead and barbecued flesh. However, the girl was not using it to harm someone, had no intention of harming anyone, and the knife is easily seen as being intended as a culinary tool and NOT a weapon. There is no reason to arrest a schoolchild for something like this. It's unjust and a mockery of the intent of the law.

Deanimator
December 19, 2007, 04:00 PM
Is cutting her meat with a knife instead of a spoon a matter of medical necessity?
Is her eating solid food instead of Insure a matter of medical necessity?

Deanimator
December 19, 2007, 04:02 PM
A knife is a tool; what makes it a "weapon" is intended use.
I'll bet Hitler wrote Mein Kampf with a pen or pencil. School children shouldn't be allowed to have pens or pencils lest they write racist screeds that start genocidal wars. Zero tolerance!

wbh
December 19, 2007, 06:00 PM
(2)(a) A person shall not possess any firearm, electric weapon or device, destructive device, or other weapon, including a razor blade, box cutter, or knife, except as authorized in support of school-sanctioned activities, at a school-sponsored event or on the property of any school, school bus, or school bus stop

So when exactly did lunch stop being a "school-sanctioned activity"? :confused:

Cosmoline
December 19, 2007, 06:06 PM
The rules are in place...the rules were violated.

The rules are idiotic, drafted and enforced by a batch of dunderheads

RustyShackelford
December 19, 2007, 06:43 PM
I don't think Doc understands my point, I'm not saying I would bring this young girl up on any formal charges under the conditions but in fairness, students should be well aware of WHY they are not allowed to bring small knives, butter knives, steak knives, Ginzu knives, etc. It's a safety/security issue.
To avoid the issue of other documented incidents where children KILLED other children with knives in the same area, is a bit crass. :rolleyes:
As I posted before, school supervisors and or local LEOs should decide what actions are taken but if they have ZT rules or need to enforce policy then so be it. The safety and security of a public school should not take a back seat to someone's feelings.
Rusty

joab
December 19, 2007, 07:21 PM
So when exactly did lunch stop being a "school-sanctioned activity"? Try reading it again, you skimmed over part of it
except as authorized

No. Nobody disagrees that the child broke a written lawWasn't exactly the question, butI'll take what I can get here
She knowingly and repeatedly broke a written law
That is what she was arrested, not for cutting steak

However, the law is unjust and should be repealed or rethoughtNo weapons on campus is a bad law?

No appeal, no consideration of circumstances; the child is sent home for two days.Wanna wager on what the wording in the school policy book was?

The antis don't want "different rules for different places" Would that be the anti steak knife coalition?
Don't like the rules then don't use the facility or work to change the rules
Don't whine about this poor little girl sitting at home not knowing what she did wrong or try to twist the incident into something it was not

Savage92
December 19, 2007, 08:13 PM
These people are stupid, it's a f***ing steak knife, what about scissors, do they not allow those too, maybe they should not allow any to the school that are pointed on the end.

AZRickD
December 19, 2007, 09:46 PM
Joab asked, "No weapons in school is a bad law?"

I resubmit my thread from TFL where I ask members to give me there lawful carrying of guns in school stories.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62602&highlight=school

It went several pages.

Rick

AZRickD
December 19, 2007, 10:07 PM
I shamefully add this from another forum:

The Florida legislature modified the wording of the "weapons" statutes (Chapter 790) to further define a knife. This was because some criminals beat concealed weapon charges for carrying meat cleavers and the like. The intent was not to turn an ordinary culinary tool into a classified weapon.

This was changed during the 2005/2006 legislative session and the new "extended" definition of knife to not include a common table knife or a plastic knife. This was more than likely due to some unpopular cases in 2004 on which the 4th District Court of Appeals overturned in 2007 even!

So the history of the law is that this was a knee jerk political response to the police being unable to prosecute or arrest someone for carrying a common table utensil! In the end, it all comes down to the purpose of the "weapon" Otherwise, I need to get rid of all my steak knives in my home. (I have a CWFL, so I guess I don't have to.)

So, is it just easy to say that she should have known it is a weapon... or, did she and her parents think it was a utensil!!! It is like saying that the little league baseball player knew his bat was a weapon, when he brought it to school to play baseball.

Let me help this thread out by offering some actual (read... real) case law about this topic...


Under the undisputed facts, the steak knife may be a dirk, or an innocent household item. But that determination is one for the finder of fact based on a consideration of the circumstances, for example, the manner in which it was carried, how [accessible] it was to the accused, its purpose, or the accused's motive for carrying it, and its ability to cause harm to another.

Reference: Walthour, 876 So. 2d at 597
also see...
Reference: Coultas v. State, —So.2d—, (4DCA 2007)

joab
December 19, 2007, 10:38 PM
I resubmit my thread from TFL where I ask members to give me there lawful carrying of guns in school stories.Your point

We no longer live in those times

There were many things done in those days that can not be done these days

These threads invariably bring out posts proclaiming that when guns were allowed in schools there were no shootings

What they never seem to grasp is that if there were no school shootings and/or we had not suffered the social decline that we have experienced over the last couple or so decades there might still be guns allowed in schools

Geno
December 19, 2007, 10:43 PM
joab said:

What they never seem to grasp is that if there were no school shootings and/or we had not suffered the social decline that we have experienced over the last couple or so decades there might still be guns allowed in schools

Until VT, the worst mass murder in a school was in Michigan...by bombing. One of the school custodians, who also was the School Board President (seriously), went in and rigged the dynamite through out the school. The year you ask??? I seem to recall in the 1929 range.

Too bad we didn't have ZT then, huh?

Doc2005

AZRickD
December 19, 2007, 10:45 PM
Joab,

There is no evidence that the girl did anything "knowlingly." Did she know what Florida law says about eating utensils? Did she read up on case law? Does the fact that she *openly* used her steak knife numerous times previously without being accosted by two lunch room attendants lead her to conclude that it was okay?

Additionally, I don't see "the times" as being different, other than what political philosophy is holding sway. And if "the times" were exactly the same, the administrators/NEA members wouldn't care. They're Kool-Aid drinkers. True believers in the Nanny State.

That, I think, is my point. This is political. It is about power. Nothing more.

Frankly, if the cross-post citing Florida legal history is accurate, this thread is over.

Not Guilty.

Rick

Geno
December 19, 2007, 10:55 PM
AZRickD:

I can't believe people are not up in arms about the child being talked to by police. That was a massive legal violation. The parents must give permission, or a judge must sign a warrant. Neither happened.

In the end, heads will roll, in the school and possibly against the PD. Why? Because the people who broke the law in the Florida 10-year-old's case, were the school employees and the police.

Doc2005

zxcvbob
December 19, 2007, 11:16 PM
Sorry, Doc. Nothing will happen. The school and the PD will claim that the principal gave consent, acting in loco parentis. Ultimately everything will be covered up "to protect the privacy of the student." The best outcome will be for the D.A. (or whoever decides juvenile cases) to refuse to prosecute.

Florida is mighty F'ed up (can I say "F"?) regarding child protection. I can easily see them putting her in foster care until she turns 18.

BTW, I know that in loco parentis requires the actions taken must be in the best interest of the child -- but the courts usually come down on the side of the school administrators when there's a conflict of interest (see New Jersey v. T. L. O.)

AZRickD
December 20, 2007, 12:06 AM
AZRickD:

I can't believe people are not up in arms about the child being talked to by police.

So much to be peeved about. I'll have to buy a vowel. ;)

joab
December 20, 2007, 12:16 AM
The year you ask???No I don't I already know that it was in Bath Michigan in 1927
What I don't know is what you think that has to do with this discussion

Why do people keep bringing irrelevant tidbits into this discussion about a girl who knowingly ans willfully broke both state law and school policy this year

Too bad we didn't have ZT then, huh?You do realize that this was done by an adult worker at the school over a period of about a year or so and not a student right

Too bad someone didn't ask why there was a ton of high explosives planted around the building though, huh?

There is no evidence that the girl did anything "knowlingly.Yes there is and it has been pointed out here several times
Additionally, I don't see "the times" as being different, other than what political philosophy is holding sway.Yes you do, you are just refusing to acknowledge the sway it does hold.
Either that or you have no concept of what is going on outside of your little cubicle
I can't believe people are not up in arms about the child being talked to by police. Maybe because the police can talk to a juvenile being charge with a crime, how else are they going to say "You are under arrest" ?

I know I was talked to plenty by the police when they were investigating crimes
And nowhere in the article does it state that she was interrogated

JCT
December 20, 2007, 12:32 AM
People are more concerned with legalities than with what is "right" or "wrong" Makes me sick to hear about narrow minded thoughtless rule followers. It does no good. Laws treat symptoms and have never been and will never be the solution. Education, awareness and the promotion of conscientiousness will ensure that people have ideals, ethics and law or no law, they'll have the common sense to do what's reasonable and right.
This girl meant no harm, caused no harm and posed no threat. The idiots dealing with the situation should be sent off to be retrained or get shock therapy...
I swear on an ever increasing basis I feel like this country is becoming Nazi Germany. I know this is a little case, but things like this simply should not happen! If authorities can be this clueless and irrational, there's no hope.

Winchester 73
December 20, 2007, 12:44 AM
Doc2005,
Bath was much worse even than VT.45 dead teachers and students.See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

joab
December 20, 2007, 01:07 AM
People are more concerned with legalities than with what is "right" or "wrong" Makes me sick to hear about narrow minded thoughtless rule followers.I know what you mean
It makes me sick when people won't read an entire thread before jumping in or at least the posts of the poster they are commenting on before they comment

JCT
December 20, 2007, 01:50 AM
Some will miss the point no matter what, maybe you don't have the capacity to examine other perspectives.
Whether or not the girl knowingly brought a steak knife to school, I don't care. She used it for her lunch....common now. What will she learn at the end of all this?? What will all the kids in that school learn? To be weak and do what you're told even when you don't agree? To not have independent and creative thoughts?? Like I said before, Nazi Germany. You'd think we'd be far from that...
I've never been the " a rules a rule" type and I feel that's the wrong thing to teach kids: "just blindly do what you're told even if you have other ideas or thoughts of your own". That's a good way to raise animals, not people.
Someone could have approached this incident differently. Talked with the girl, asked her why she thought she should break the rule.
Someday, I wouldn't be surprised that owning a gun will be against the rules. Personally, I won't be able to follow that rule on the basis that I don't believe it's right.
Lot's of mixed opinions on this subject, but I'd say there needs to be more young kids like that girl, who see through some of these weak meaningless rules. I'd do the same if I were in her position. If I felt that I needed a steak knife at lunch, I'd bring one.

gunsmith
December 20, 2007, 02:41 AM
Why do people keep bringing irrelevant tidbits into this discussion about a girl who knowingly ans willfully broke both state law and school policy this year

knowingly ans willfully

There is a reason why we treat ten year olds like children.
She probably thought it applied to kids doing bad stuff and she was trying to eat like a lady.
It was up to the parents to insure that she wasn't going to get in trouble, not a ten year old. They do not have the comprehension or the attention span to figure stupid variations of ZT.

Robert Hairless
December 20, 2007, 03:58 AM
I don't think Doc understands my point, I'm not saying I would bring this young girl up on any formal charges under the conditions but in fairness, students should be well aware of WHY they are not allowed to bring small knives, butter knives, steak knives, Ginzu knives, etc. It's a safety/security issue.

To avoid the issue of other documented incidents where children KILLED other children with knives in the same area, is a bit crass.

I couldn't explain to a child why butter knives are a safety/security issue because I don't understand it myself. The only two explanations that I see to make are: 1. Because the school says so, and 2. Because some knives are dangerous so we ban all knives.

I think I could give the first explanation but I would have to add that school is an arbitrary, irrational place in which you better do what you're told or we will punish you. Maybe I wouldn't have to say that, though, because I suspect that most kids would perceive it without being told.

The second explanation would be tougher for me to make because I wouldn't know how to respond if the child asked why kids who haven't done anything wrong should be punished because some kids did do wrong.

You can't really argue that butter knives are inherently dangerous. They aren't. They don't cut or pierce anything with more resistance than, say, butter. You could argue that they violate the rules because they are called "butter knives," and it's the name that's important. I can buy that argument without reservation. If I were the parent of a child in a school run that way my child would have no problems. Here, for example, is not a butter knife but a butter spreader,[/I like this one made by Oneida:
http://www.pjpmarketplace.com/catalog/430420.jpg (http://www.pjpmarketplace.com/servlet/the-256/Butter-Spreader%2C-JUILLIARD%2C-Flatware/Detail?zmam=9154908&zmas=1&zmac=4&zmap=430420)
It is indeed called a Julliard Butter [I]Spreader, not a butter knife, so it is not prohibited by school policy or Florida state law.

I most certainly would not allow my child to take a steak knife to that school in violation of school policy, but there's no policy against a bovine separation instrument. Of course I would not allow my child to take a toy gun to that school, but if the little tyke wanted to carry her hand/eye coordination device to show her friends there should be no objection.

People who fear names and words are entangled in superstition and unable to think clearly.

I have no difficulty at all in agreeing with "To avoid the issue of other documented incidents where children KILLED other children with knives in the same area, is a bit crass" as long as you will do it too, not merely pick and choose whatever supports your own irrational beliefs. Play fair.

So you must agree that we cannot avoid the issue of documented incidents where anyone kills children or anything is used to kill them. Unless we've completely lost our way the goal is--or should be--to help children stay alive. So you don't want to argue that it's okay to kill children in schools as long as you don't use anything prohibited by school policy to kill them. You also don't want to argue that it's okay to kill them as long as their killers aren't other children.

I want the school to ban every kind of instrument used to kill children of that age and every kind of person who has done it--and also the representations of those instruments and people. Do that and I will wholeheartedly support that preemptive approach because I will have absolute confidence that the policy will indeed save children's lives.

Then we could get rid of all principals, teachers, and other school employees, and convert the schools to condominiums or tear them down to provide much needed parking lots, and we all would save money on our taxes.

Do your homework on the instruments used to kill children and the people who do it. Cars and buses kill children: ban them from school property. Water, electricity and gas kill children: remove them from schools. Tainted food kills children: prohibit all food from schools. Stairways kill many children: remove them from schools. Broken glass kills children, disease kills children, ingesting small objects kills children .... Remove everything from all schools that have killed even one child anywhere. Other kids have indeed killed children and shall in the future: ban all children schools and school property. Parents have killed many children: ban them for sure. Teachers have killed children: teachers are a real danger to children and should not be allowed anywhere near them.

Do all that and I'm your man. I will support you and the school to the end, which should come quickly if its reasoning is applied as it should be. What good do you do by focusing on a stupid butter knife to the exclusion of the real killers of children.

And why create a system concerned only with their physical survival at the cost of their minds, spirits, emotions, and morale. Your school system has done a superb job of frightening kids, teaching them not to trust other children and all adults too, even their own parents, and to march in lockstep at the pace of the slowest child and the least competent teacher.

That system needs much more intelligent defenses than I've seen here, or anywhere else. The defenses that I have seen would pass as damnation in a reasonable society.

"The rules are the rules" isn't a defense, nor even a lame excuse, and most certainly not a justification for destroying young people. It's the kind of repressive thought that twists education into penal servitude.

I don't want kids sentenced to serve twelve years in government sponsored mental institutions where the goal is to make them docile, keep them away from sharp objects, and teach them as little as possible so as to kill time until they're released.

Old Fuff
December 20, 2007, 09:05 AM
Ah yes... I do so enjoy Robert's wit, not to mention his logic. In all to many instances, today's schools destroy children, or at least impair their future, all in the name of safety and security. Of course it has little to do with real safety or security because the rules and regulations, not to mention laws, aren't really enforceable against those who would do violence, unless they are accidentally caught. So they go after those who have no criminal intent because that's much easier,safer and not at all dangerous.

The leftists that control today's public schools have no concern for students as individuals because socialist thinking tends to put people into faceless groups, and then set up various plans to support and supposedly benefit the group as a whole. Zero Tolerance by whatever name is designed to protect the whole, at the expense of individuals that get caught in its unforgiving (and usually unfair) web.

In the community where I live, private and state-supported charter schools in K through 12 now outnumber their public school counterparts. I suppose parents could and should rebel, but they seem to be taking the easier route of simply moving their children to other schools where they have more input, and find fewer loonies on the staff and running the classrooms.

The core issue here is not so much knives, guns or other weapons, but the way some schools are being run, and the obvious incompetence and political values of the educational establishment that is running them. Any school that is willing to trash a student, especially one in elementary school, just to make a point is one I wouldn’t send any child of mine to. Hopefully the parents in this school district will take a hard look at what’s happening to their kids and clean house.

But I wouldn’t bet on it. :banghead:

joab
December 20, 2007, 09:30 AM
The core issue here is not so much knives, guns or other weapons, but the way some schools are being run,I would add that it is the way the schools are being allowed to be run

Which is my whole point

If you don't like the rules work to change them, but don't whine when you agree to follow them and get caught violating them

Th schools are only ruining the ruinable children those with heart will remember these incidents and work towards change in the future
Worthwhile parents have already started rebelling against the system by sending their children to better schools or home schooling them instead of whining about how their children are being mistreated for breaking rules that they agreed to make their children follow

Geno
December 20, 2007, 10:06 AM
winchester73:

Thank-you! Wow, 45. I thought it was 25. It's been a while since I read the article.

zxcvbob said:

Sorry, Doc. Nothing will happen. The school and the PD will claim that the principal gave consent, acting in loco parentis. Ultimately everything will be covered up "to protect the privacy of the student." The best outcome will be for the D.A. (or whoever decides juvenile cases) to refuse to prosecute.

Incorrect! When a person's word can result in subsequent criminal prosecution, regardless of location, that person has 5th Amendment protections.

In loco parentis deals with the day-to-day running of the school, not criminal investigation. Where the potential for prosecution enters, only three people can permit discussion with police: parents or a judge. Most judges are too smart to allow this one!

If this kid gets prosecuted, heads will roll. Even if the kid does not get prosecuted, heads should roll. The prosecution may happen, but will never succeed. The first thing the defense should do is have all evidence tossed per illegally obtained.

Recall that I said I escorted a couple of state troopers to the property line...I'm not joking. They wanted to talk to the child, but did not have a judge's signature, nor the parents' permission. They were seriously urinated off with me and launched some threats on me. I made one phone call a professional acquaintance at their state headquarters...that misconduct stopped pretty darned fast.

Principals have tremendous power on campus, but the parents have more power when it comes to their children. There is NO in loco parentis when we are talking criminal prosecution...none.

Doc2005

Travis Lee
December 20, 2007, 10:18 AM
Joab wrote, "Th[e] schools are only ruining the ruinable children..."

just.... wow.

You do make a point, this will continue until so many people feel angry enough that they take action.

Most parents are so disconnected, that they probably fully support the "zero-tolerance zero judgement" system in place.... until their child gets suspended or arrested.

And if a few dozen children, per year, per school need to get mangled up in the gears, well... too bad for them.

And if one of these children actually DOES turn dangerous, hold a grudge and goes back to visit the principal in a few years, with an AK.... well... that's too bad, too.

--Travis--

zxcvbob
December 20, 2007, 10:21 AM
If this kid gets prosecuted, heads will roll. Even if the kid does not get prosecuted, heads should roll. The prosecution may happen, but will never succeed. The first thing the defense should do is have all evidence tossed per illegally obtained.

I agree with you, but inexplicably the Supreme Court does not. In New Jersey vs. T.L.O., a principal searched kids' lockers without probable cause or a warrant because he was in loco parentis, then when he found drugs he switched to acting as an officer of the state and turned the evidence over to the police for prosecution. The SC said that this was proper, and not a violation of their constitutional rights.

In my opinion (which isn't worth much) any evidence obtained via in loco parentis should be inadmissible in court under the 4th and 5th Amendments. I may have my amendment numbers mixed up (I don't think so), but anyway the SC seems to think that while they are in school students give up all of their constitutional rights except a small remnant of the 1st Amendment.

Geno
December 20, 2007, 10:30 AM
Yes, yes, T.L.O. I recall it clearly. What I am saying is, go ahead and call the police...but, they may NOT talk to that child without the parents' permission.

Oh, and by the way, if the police requested the administrator to search, or continue to search, T.L.O. is out the window. Judges take that fact pretty seriously. I had to deal with it under oath more than once. T.L.O. is is not relevant.

Edit:

Let me through out an interesting twist. An 18-year-old student comes to the front office and requests to view this CA-60. While he is 18, he is still enrolled as a student, and resides with the parents. Ergo, he is not fully emancipated. Can you allow the "adult" student to see their file without the parents' signature?

Answer: Absolutely not! The parents must fully give the signature to approve.

Doc2005

AZRickD
December 20, 2007, 10:37 AM
Joab:Yes there is and it has been pointed out here several times
What is the evidence that this girl, who openly, and on several occasions, used a knife to cut her food in the lunch room without so much as a hiccup from the lunch lady, was aware of this rule?

Geno
December 20, 2007, 10:45 AM
AZ:

Most schools require the student and parents to sign the handbook as a condition of being allowed to attend. However, in a worst-case scenario the student violated the handbook, not ZT.

If she knew, if she were told no, insubordination is the way to deal with it, not ZT. Give her a day out and drop it.

Doc2005

joab
December 20, 2007, 11:15 AM
And a link to that handbook was given here in this thread, complete with the signature page

I have been known to openly;y speed past police cars on the interstate without so much as a hiccup from the officer, does that mean I should sit there and wonder why I am getting a ticket when he does hiccup.
Hell it doesn't even mean that he saw me do it, what evidence do you have that she was even observed by any staff when she brought the knife into the school on previous occasions

And if a few dozen children, per year, per school need to get mangled up in the gears, well... too bad for them.
So are you goig to go on a "for the children tirade" here
And if one of these children actually DOES turn dangerous, hold a grudge and goes back to visit the principal in a few years, with an AK.... well... that's too bad, too.And what if it rains on the third Friday of the fifth month for ten days and eight nights while the moon is in the seventh house...
If he comes back with an AK have the resource officer shoot the bastard, how's that for simplistic what iffing

But I will take it you did not understand my ruinable comment and chose not to ask for clarification

Some children will have their spirit broken some will develop spirit from these rules
They can either work to change these rules or whine about getting in trouble when they get caught breaking them

That will always happen no matter what set of rules you have in place

Geno
December 20, 2007, 11:20 AM
joab said:

Some children will have their spirit broken some will develop spirit from these rules
They can either work to change these rules or whine about getting in trouble when they get caught breaking them

Awesome statement! Day one I always told the students, "If you disagree with the rules, don't break them...seek to change them! I will support you every step of the way!" The students did a great job of changing several handbook rules...they did it the right way!

The students did the research, and the students had to appear in front of the School Board to present the proposed changes. I attended and supported, but they presented the law and the rationale. In every instance, the School Board listened and modified the handbook...even mid-year!!!

Now, that is a lesson that the children can take forward throughout their lives.

Kudos on that comment!

Doc2005

joab
December 20, 2007, 11:21 AM
"If you disagree with the rules, don't break them...seek to change them! I will support you every step of the way!Then why are you mad at me
I've been saying that throughout this whole discussion:)

Geno
December 20, 2007, 11:25 AM
joab:

I'm not mad at you. :D Seriously sorry if my words have come across that way. I'm not mad at anyone.

We have all engaged in a fantastic discussion in this thread! It will become a searchable thread, for others who may have questions, doubts or concerns of the topic in the future.

We all have our views and have posted those points and views...the differing views is why this thread is so strong.

Doc2005

joab
December 20, 2007, 11:34 AM
Just joking Doc

If nothing else she will have learned a very valuable life lesson, if anyone takes the time to point it out to her

Anything you sign or agree to is binding, if you don't like the conditions don't sign

I still would like to see if she was ever even charged

I have read an article on the arresting officers account and it did not seem like they were all that enthused about arresting her
It did state that she was arrested because the parents could not be reached and that apparently was their only two options when the school reports a crime

She was not handcuffed and was later released to an uncle, I believe

Owens
December 20, 2007, 12:00 PM
Most interesting discussion. Now I'm just kind of thinking out loud here, but is the active hitch in ZT application based on ability to determine intent?

In this particular case, harmful intent (the 3rd point of ZT application) was obviously not there.

Given a slightly different set of circumstances, it may not be so easy to determine the presence or lack of harmful intent. Therefore, administration just takes a zero thought approach? Again, I'm just thinking out loud on this, but I sorta feel that is the real view of what is likely happening in these types of cases. In other words, I am asking (saying?) is it just easier to apply this ZT stuff without thinking than it is to investigate a little?

Geno
December 20, 2007, 12:33 PM
Owens wins a cigar!!! Easier to be a mindless ZT-law follower and let the police sort it out. :banghead: Go back to my quote about the child who drove his father's vehicle...with the 870 in the trunk...I said it's a good thing I had such a good relationship with the parents and students...bingo!!!

Intent is the hitch!!! My unspoken fear...how does the administrator REALLY know the intent? Scary!

<<Geno passes Owens a cigar...what'll it be??? Double Corona? Montecristo?>> :)

Also, go back to the suggestions I put out of get to know the administrators, the School Board and get on committees at the school?! Bingo...be sure they know you...your intent.

Doc2005

JCT
December 20, 2007, 12:36 PM
Joab, it's twisted to think that having irrational rules is the best way for children to learn and desire to take action to change them. I'm sure 10 year olds have enough on their plate without having to worry about changing ridiculous rules set in place by narrow minded authorities.
We had a handbook in our school too. It works good on paper. But is never practical to generalize and treat everyone as potential criminals.
Students study history so they can learn from past mistakes and not make them again. Hopefully they learn about the past laws that caused and continue to cause chaos and war. They learn about equal rights and freedom and ethics. About the defeatist people against individual creative thought and development.
I laugh when writing this because we're talking about a butter knife, but the issue is much bigger. It makes me think about the lady who was awarded $1,000,000 in a law suit for getting a hot coffee from Macdonalds. There's a problem in the system to say the least. Maybe we need more laws and everything will function smoothly?? I don't think so. We already have laws to protect us from other laws. The legal system here is a mess with no end.
There's plenty of rules, as american citizens, we agree to follow or suffer consequences. Many laws/rules I can't and won't agree with. By doing so, I harm noone, I use common sense and safety and do what I think is right and positive for others. For example, traffic laws aren't always made with safety in mind. I've had times where following the traffic law would have caused an accident. Some laws I don't agree with but follow to avoid the hassle ( toll booths, misc permits for ridiculous things, such as gold prospecting..I pay $25 a year to the state so I can pan gold..Common now, some years I go once...I hope they start stocking the streams since they're collecting our money.
As to the analogy about speeding... Do you think going over the speed limit is wrong? Is it unsafe? If so, why do our vehicles go that fast? Why do vehicle sold today as fast as 120mph+?? Where can we drive that fast? Now, that's the department of safety who imposes speed and traffic laws. If they had a true concern for safety, vehicles with the speeds they can do today would not be legal. My van can easily go over 100, why?? It's unsafe right?
Well, make all vehicles so the top speed is about 70 and they'll be an extreme reduction of speed violation revenue. Again, is this a rule that's for good, or for gain??? What do I learn from it, that I should change it?? I'll let you know how that goes. I'm sure I can get auto companies to work with me and police will agree to cut revenue and drop public funding.
I've seen more accidents and danger caused by police on the road, half way in the road, with blinding lights on, to issue a speeding ticket. Dept of safety is a joke... Now, this doesn't mean I think we should speed, but this is a good example of a bad rule/law that we all blindly follow and aren't in a position to change, but are essentially forced to comply, whether right or wrong.
We have laws to protect us from other laws, what's right in one town is wrong in the other.... That's the issue to me, the entire thought process of the people making decisions that effect the rest of us.
Another thing, the "what if" has been and will be very valuable as we need to find creative solutions for the mess that will ultimately need dealing with. I despise when people shoot down the "what if" thought process. If people had more foresight and "what if", they'd see the possible shortcomings of ideas and plans before they acted on them. That's sadly missing in many of the people who are in position to make rules/laws today. To me it's as though some people are just sleeping their whole lives, not really aware or concerned with issues. Where would we be if the founding fathers never asked "what if" , or Edison, Lincoln, Ford...etc
I think of the end of "Charlie and the Chocolate factory" when Charlie broke the rules, but was still chosen to win because he was good, honest and caring. They should reward this girl for having her own thoughts and not being another drone produced by this broken system.

Owens
December 20, 2007, 12:48 PM
Geno,
<<Lights up...small Monte, please. Thanks!>>
You ever get down my way, cigars and Jameson on me!

Robert Hairless
December 20, 2007, 01:21 PM
You do make a point, this will continue until so many people feel angry enough that they take action.

True, and that's why my posts on this and related subjects are so passionate. It hurts to see children ruined: no 10-year-old girl should be sacrificed to make a point that rules are rules.

I don't share Joab's resolution that "Th schools are only ruining the ruinable children those with heart will remember these incidents and work towards change in the future". All children are ruinable. I'm not a soft person, I'm not sentimental and don't sentimentalize kids, and my own children have been adults for many years, but there is nothing in my heart or mind that allows me to see any child as expendable. Schools for me are not boot camps or prisons in which only the fit should survive and dedicate themselves to fix the institution that hurt them or change it. And I don't think it's reasonable to expect young children to fix problems created by adults who don't know what they're doing. It's especially unreasonable to expect success in that line from children who have passed through the meat grinder of American schools. What we force into the grinder is better than what comes out. No one is really happy with what comes out the other end or with the schools that produce it.

Unlike many others here, I suspect, I am a firm believer in public schools. Just not in the kind that destroys kids for the sake of some bizarre social scheme that has no chance of success at accomplishing anything except destroy kids.

Perhaps the nature of my arguments would be different if American schools could show that the children who pass through them are at least well educated. I still would argue that the transmission of knowledge and skills can be achieved without repression, and achieved with much better results when kids are not twisted into being frightened by the world around them, but these schools are dismal failures by any measure.

I've lived through generations in which educational theorists have imposed various philosophies, strategies, techniques, and approaches on American educational practices. Today's panacea always becomes tomorrow's problem that requires immediate remedy because it has failed. There is nothing new. It's the inherent rhythm of American education and has been for decades. Superimposed on it is a web of law that becomes increasingly complex and counterproductive. It doesn't work, hasn't worked, can't work, and so we do more of it, which makes no sense at all.

Schools don't even accomplish the purported goal of these Zero Tolerance policies: to help keep the kids physically safe. Perhaps they do achieve the creation of Zero Tolerance people, but is that the result we should want?

It's the parents and other adults who must fix the problems. That's why they are adults and not children.

Geno
December 20, 2007, 01:35 PM
Owens:

I was JUST in San Antonio...mid-Nov! Awesome city!!!

Doc2005

joab
December 20, 2007, 11:35 PM
Joab, it's twisted to think that having irrational rules is the best way for children to learn and desire to take action to change them.yes it would be twisted to think that irrational rules is the best way for children to learn and desire to take action to change them.
Who do you know that feels that way?
Certainly not me and I challenge you to show me where I have said that I do

The rules are in place now and are enforced with zero latitude now
Pining away about what would be the best case scenario may be a good topic for what if-ing but has little value in real life unless you have people in place that will actually work for change.

I laugh when writing this because we're talking about a butter knife,Don't laugh too hard because it was a steak knife
According to authorities, school employees spotted the girl cutting her food while she was eating lunch and took the steak knife from her.

scurtis_34471
December 21, 2007, 12:35 AM
This one has me especially pissed because it happened in my home town. The principal and the school board will definitely hear from me on this one. I pay taxes that support these bozos. I'm so glad my kids aren't in public schools.

AZRickD
December 21, 2007, 12:41 AM
Anything you sign or agree to is binding, if you don't like the conditions don't sign
Legally binding on a 9-year old? Really? Does a school have something like Major League Baseball's anti-trust exemption on age of consent?

I spent 15 of the best years of my life in elementary school (four of them of them in second and fifth grade) and I've never read a school handbook.

Old Fuff
December 21, 2007, 01:33 AM
scurtis_34471:

Good, and while you’re at it, print out a copy of this thread and give it to them. Tell them that thanks to the Internet your town has become a national disgrace, and both the school system and police department are being held up as horrible examples of the worst kind.

They will probably give you the old routine about being not being able to say anything because of “privacy issues.” In that case tell them that they don’t have to say anything, because actions say much more then words. :scrutiny: :cuss:

Robert Hairless
December 21, 2007, 06:20 AM
Joab:

I laugh when writing this because we're talking about a butter knife,

Don't laugh too hard because it was a steak knife

According to authorities, school employees spotted the girl cutting her food while she was eating lunch and took the steak knife from her.

Joab, doesn't it make you sick "when people won't read an entire thread before jumping in or at least the posts of the poster they are commenting on before they comment"? (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=4006822&postcount=155)

But it's good for a laugh when someone who constantly picks at other people and claims to be a close reader and superior moral absolutist simultaneously trips over his tongue and puts his foot in his mouth. This is such a remarkable feat of acrobatics that we need to assure other readers we hadn't prearranged it just to demonstrate your agility. Folks, this is not a trick. You are seeing it live, on our stage, as it is happening for real.

If you had read all of my message before jumping in (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=4007026&postcount=158)to exercise your wit on it you would have, should have, could have seen that it was in response to a message posted by Rusty Shackleford (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=4005642&postcount=141) in which he said:

I don't think Doc understands my point, I'm not saying I would bring this young girl up on any formal charges under the conditions but in fairness, students should be well aware of WHY they are not allowed to bring small knives, butter knives, steak knives, Ginzu knives, etc. It's a safety/security issue.

I even quoted his statement at the beginning of my message. That's the way discussions go: someone posts a message and someone else responds, as in a very large freeform discussion.

So, yes, the little girl used a steak knife to cut her food and you're mad with anticipation at the thought of ruining her life because of it, but we--Rusty Shackleford having said his piece, that is, and I responding to it--were talking about Rusty's butter knife as I responded to what he posted. Not you but Rusty. I know what you think: hang the kid because she broke a rule, and hang everyone who would prefer to find ways not to hang little kids. Rusty, though I don't at all agree with him, says things worth considering.

Now be a nice absolutist and go find someone else to play with. Shoo. :)

joab
December 21, 2007, 08:50 AM
yes, the little girl used a steak knife to cut her food and you're mad with anticipation at the thought of ruining her life because of itTalk about the pot calling the kettle black
Nowhere have I expressed any mad desire to ruin the girls life
My first post even stated the opposite
I challenge you to show me where I have


Now lets examine the second part of your post
You will notice that your extremely ignorable blathering of butter knives and bovine separation tools
Addresses a comment made by Rusty not JCT
You will further notice that JCT has not given any indication that he is speaking to anyone but me or that he has even read your post

Joab, it's twisted to think that having irrational rules is the best way for children to learn and desire to take action to change them. I'm sure 10 year olds have enough on their plate without having to worry about changing ridiculous rules set in place by narrow minded authorities.
We had a handbook in our school too. It works good on paper. But is never practical to generalize and treat everyone as potential criminals.
Students study history so they can learn from past mistakes and not make them again. Hopefully they learn about the past laws that caused and continue to cause chaos and war. They learn about equal rights and freedom and ethics. About the defeatist people against individual creative thought and development.
I laugh when writing this because we're talking about a butter knife, but the issue is much bigger. It makes me think about the lady who was awarded $1,000,000 in a law suit for getting a hot coffee from Macdonalds. There's a problem in the system to say the least. Maybe we need more laws and everything will function smoothly?? I don't think so. We already have laws to protect us from other laws. The legal system here is a mess with no end.
Now show me where he shows that he is addressing you or your post
Show me where he gives any indication that he has shifted focus from me to you or anyone but the coffee lady
Show me where he addresses you or your comment at all
Or are you claiming a copyright on the word "Butter Knife"
Rusty Shackleford having said his piece, that is, and I responding to it--were talking about Rusty's butter knife as I responded to what he posted. Not you but Rusty.And I was responding to JCT
You see that's how it goes in a large free form discussion

AZRickD
December 23, 2007, 12:34 AM
Joab,

While you've busied yourself with debating in this small cave called THR, I'd wager hundreds of people have emailed this school and, hmmm, possibly the school that their child attends.

This is the Activism forum. Have you activated?

Rick

joab
December 23, 2007, 12:42 AM
I see you can not defeat my argument so you try to shift it, nice

In this case no I have not "activated"
The girl was wrong and I have no dog in that particular fight
I have done my part to the point of almost being arrested myself in past ZT issues that pertained to my children
Have you done more than just fire of an e-mail that they can add to their delete file after replying with a canned statement and hitting reply all, if they even do that much
You're so radical



And the silence from Richard is deafening

I think the words he should be groping for are
"Sorry Joab my bad",
"I stand corrected , or apologies to Joab for misreading"

But slinking away is good too

Robert Hairless
December 23, 2007, 01:59 AM
Joab:

And the silence from Richard is deafening

I think the words he should be groping for are
"Sorry Joab my bad",
"I stand corrected , or apologies to Joab for misreading"

But slinking away is good too

I don't think that there's anything more for Richard to say, Joab, or anything more that Richard need say.

When you so clearly demonstrate the central problem with you that Richard and others have explained, it is pointless for Richard or anyone else to waste more time in explanation. :)

joab
December 23, 2007, 07:00 AM
You are correct Richard (sorry your irrelevance has manifested itself in my total inability to even remember your name, but the long form of Dick just seemed to fit your personality )
Your previous post to me demonstrates your self righteous superiority attitude
Your last one demonstrates your total lack of integrity

I have no further use for someone such as yourself who would post such a blatant personal attack and then refuse to acknowledge when he is proven wrong

This demonstrates that you are indeed nothing but a totally irrelevant pseudo intellectual, semi literate, half witted cowardly jackass

All in all your history has shown you to be nothing but a slightly humorous long winded twisty boy who will twist and belittle a persons argument to fit your comedy routine

AntiqueCollector
December 23, 2007, 07:29 AM
Knock it off.

Geno
December 23, 2007, 07:43 AM
Wow, I'll second that thought. It seems the thread has out-lived its useful life.

Doc2005

joab
December 23, 2007, 08:02 AM
Wow It would have been nice if someone had jumped in during the attack

This thread was in decline when some thought it was a better tactic to twist comments than to address the argument

Since some who just want to argue without substance missed it
Granted the rule is stupid and the punishment is ludicrous
But these rules are not a secret known only to the upper classmen or the inner circles
They have been in place for a long time and ny student who violates them is either stupid or not paying attention

Something should be done about these zero tolerance policies but it is hard to feel a lot of sympathy for this individual student, unless she did it to draw attention and make a stand

Show me how this even resembles the twists that have been attributed to it

Old Fuff
December 23, 2007, 09:01 AM
The main problem with Zero Tolerance is that by its nature it imposes the same penalties and punishment on all students regardless of their age and maturity. Thus a first grade student (age 6 or 7) is judged the same way a high school senior (age 17 to 19) would be. Clearly the mind set and thinking of a 10 year-old is not likely to be the same as someone almost twice her age. I am sure the girl in question didn’t see her knife in a context of being a weapon, and there is no reason to think she had any intention of using it that way. But it makes no difference. There cannot be any mitigating circumstances. A rule was broken – and a law too! Punishment must fit the crime regardless! Zero Tolerance demands nothing less because all who violate are equal!!! Where are the handcuffs??? Take her away!!!

I think not. Young children should be judged by what is age appropriate, and forgiven for honest mistakes that do no harm. I would be much less generous with adults that seem to be much closer to age 10 when it comes to the way they think and act.

AZRickD
December 23, 2007, 12:06 PM
Joab had the unmitigated gall to post:

I see you can not defeat my argument so you try to shift it, nice

In this case no I have not "activated"
The girl was wrong and I have no dog in that particular fight

Joab, buddy. Do you have any idea in which forum you are posting?

It's called "Activism" for a reason.

Do you know in whose thread you are posting?

It's my thread.

Do you know what I asked people to do?

I asked them to contact the school.

Are you in violation of THR guidelines?

Yes:
This forum is dedicated to activism to promote the RKBA.

Please use this forum to coordinate and work together. This is the place to organize. Use this forum for campaigns, legal gatherings, letter writing, talking points to push on the media, and things of this nature.

This is not the place to come up with ideas, use L&P for that. This is not the place to debate ideas.

I say, Zero-Tolerance for you.

Moderators, please suspend Joab from the Activism forum for a period of two weeks.

After all, he should have known better (and he fulfilled all of Doc's "Three Points of ZT" (tm).

Rick
I've already forgiven him, but he must accept his punishment.

tabsr
December 23, 2007, 06:26 PM
Remove all forks and knives in the school staff room, replace with dog bowls.

langenc
December 23, 2007, 08:39 PM
While she is in the "office" she can pick up a dozen condoms.

JCT
December 23, 2007, 08:53 PM
I didn't ask for this thread to be posted in activism, I'm not about to get involved with this case. Should I not offer my opinion, or join the discussion> Rick only used that as a cop out when things weren't going as he'd like.
I don't agree 100% with any one persons opinion, but everyone here has had valid and open minded points worth time and consideration. That's what this forum is for, to collectively find solutions and discuss social situations that may or may not require activism from the guests here.

AZRickD
December 23, 2007, 10:15 PM
Cop-out?

Try Rhetorical Tool.

And he *is* in violation.

You are incorrect about the purpose of this forum. Activism, not argumentation.

It is stated in the stickied thread. Try reading it.

Joab should be shunned with two weeks on the Ignore List. :)

Rick

Geno
December 23, 2007, 10:39 PM
Folks, we all need to adhere to the rules...attack ideas, not people. There is room for disagreement. Let's do so professionally.

Doc2005

Larry Ashcraft
December 23, 2007, 10:48 PM
Okay, I've only read the last posts in this thread, but please.

Step back, take a breath, take a BIG breath, and try to keep the insults to yourselves.

Closed.

If you enjoyed reading about "Florida: Student arrested for cutting food with knife" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!