Student Arrested After Cutting Food With Knife

[Andrew Green]

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.

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

 

[Kacey]

That happened here when Colorado first passed the "no exceptions" law about weapons in school in the mid-90s. A third-grade girl accidentally got her mother's brown bag lunch instead of her own, which included an apple and a paring knife about 2 inches long. The girl took the knife to the teacher in charge of the lunchroom (quite properly, I think), who took it from her and reported it to the principal. Despite a great hue and cry from the populace, the newly-passed law allowed no loopholes, and the girl was expelled from school. The principal did his best to minimize the punishment, making the expulsion 1 day instead of the more common year (the maximum expulsion period allowed by state law) - but that couldn't change the fact that this girl had an expulsion for bringing a weapon to school on her permanent record that followed her all the way to college.

The law has since been amended to not punish students who unknowingly bring a weapon to school, but it took this case and several like to get the exceptions passed - over loud protests from the group that proposed the original law in the first place.

 

[Andrew Green]

I think the word "weapon" is rather subjective as well, there are plenty of school supplies and even pieces of clothing that could be used as weapons. Safety scissors all the way until grad? Geometry has to go, those compasses have pointy ends. And lets not get started on pencils. Not only could someone get stabbed, they contain LEAD.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Sometimes I wonder what they really are teaching kids...extreme reactionist crap like this makes me sick.

 

[MBuzzy]

I'm so glad I graduated before any of this crap started.

 

[jks9199]

Legislators and policy writers come up with these zero tolerance policies without a thought to the consequences. Then they get surprised when there are problems in application.

It's simple. Leave discretion in the right hands, whether that be cops, judges, school administrators, or prosecutors.

With regard to the idea of weapons... It's scary the belts that they'll let a kid wear, or stuff they'll let them bring to school -- all while prohibiting a penknife, boxcutter, or butter knife, possessed for legitimate uses. Just like on airplanes... No weapons, but they won't look twice at a cane, or belt, or bookbag strap, or lots of other things that are at least as dangerous.

 

[FearlessFreep]

Sometimes I wonder what they really are teaching kids...extreme reactionist crap like this makes me sick.

It's because if something goes wrong then we look for a cause to blame, so it's easier to just ban everything, with little attempt at common sense or judgement in the interpretation of particular events. Nobody can hold you accountable if there is a zero-tolerance policy and you just enforce the policy, but they will tar and feather you if attempt to use any sort of wisdom and something goes wrong

 

[tellner]

This is to be expected any time you have "zero tolerance" or its foreign policy equivalent the "one percent doctrine". Zero tolerance means zero intelligence. One percent means one percent efficiency and bankruptcy (fiscal and moral).

 

[arnisador]

Sometimes I wonder what they really are teaching kids...extreme reactionist crap like this makes me sick.

That's zero tolerance for you. How many times must we show that it sounds good but produces unwanted side-effects? There are always grey areas.

As mentioned, eliminating "weapons" rules out some useful tools while simultaneously allowing other tools that could be used to injure. It's fear over sense.

 

[Ray]

I think the word "weapon" is rather subjective as well, there are plenty of school supplies and even pieces of clothing that could be used as weapons. Safety scissors all the way until grad? Geometry has to go, those compasses have pointy ends. And lets not get started on pencils. Not only could someone get stabbed, they contain LEAD.

The pencil's lead is not lead, it is graphite. Now, the paint on the outside of the pencil maybe, just might (probably not) contain lead.

 

[MBuzzy]

You know....I think that this is completely idiotic......BUT, I have to play devil's advocate here.

I'm in the military and it goes without saying that we have a lot of rules and policies that make very little sense and are hard to justify. But, as I move up through the ranks and get more experience, I see where a lot of these rules come from. They are made over time, over the course of many problems, mistakes, and issues. Eventually, the knee jerk is made.

So, I'm not saying that it is right.....but I can see why these rules exist. And moreso, I can put myself in the shoes of the teachers. Heck, if I was a teacher, I'd turn kids in for ANYTHING I considered even moderately questionable...why? Because its your JOB at stake. The parents won't think twice about frying you and your career if anything goes wrong, even if it is completely out of control.

There are plenty of times when someone who worked for me has done something that I normally wouldn't care about....but I've had to take administrative action, because if anything went wrong, I would PERSONALLY be held responsible. So I swallow my pride and better judgement and make the call. But....at the same time, when it really doesn't make sense, I'll make the call and also defend them and temper the punishment with an acknowledgement of the stupidity of the rule. These teachers don't have that option.

What I'm saying is that if some kid took that same steak knife and stabbed another kid in the throat, who would the administration and parents go after? The teachers responsible.

 

[Empty Hands]

I'm in the military and it goes without saying that we have a lot of rules and policies that make very little sense and are hard to justify.

I see what you are saying here. However, I would be willing to bet there are few-to-no such rules that someone sufficiently high in rank couldn't countermand when the situation demanded it. Hence the difference here. All discernment, judgment and flexibility has been removed from the administration by this policy. Even when the administration knew the student did not break the spirit of the rule, their hands were tied.

It is also inevitable that for every rule, no matter how well crafted, there will be those oddballs that slip through the cracks. Thus the need for the powers of judgment to remain with those in charge.

 

[Gordon Nore]

So, I'm not saying that it is right.....but I can see why these rules exist. And moreso, I can put myself in the shoes of the teachers. Heck, if I was a teacher, I'd turn kids in for ANYTHING I considered even moderately questionable...why? Because its your JOB at stake. The parents won't think twice about frying you and your career if anything goes wrong, even if it is completely out of control.

Sad, but true.

 

[MBuzzy]

I see what you are saying here. However, I would be willing to bet there are few-to-no such rules that someone sufficiently high in rank couldn't countermand when the situation demanded it. Hence the difference here. All discernment, judgment and flexibility has been removed from the administration by this policy. Even when the administration knew the student did not break the spirit of the rule, their hands were tied.

It is also inevitable that for every rule, no matter how well crafted, there will be those oddballs that slip through the cracks. Thus the need for the powers of judgment to remain with those in charge.

Exactly true....and it is a real shame when common reason doesn't win out. Unfortunately, those at the lower levels were doing what they had to......and the administration didn't do their part in overturning rules with a dose of common sense.

 

[jks9199]

I see what you are saying here. However, I would be willing to bet there are few-to-no such rules that someone sufficiently high in rank couldn't countermand when the situation demanded it. Hence the difference here. All discernment, judgment and flexibility has been removed from the administration by this policy. Even when the administration knew the student did not break the spirit of the rule, their hands were tied.

It is also inevitable that for every rule, no matter how well crafted, there will be those oddballs that slip through the cracks. Thus the need for the powers of judgment to remain with those in charge.

Part of first line supervision (and teachers are first line supervisors of the kids in their classes) is knowing when to turn a blind eye to the rules.

I'm not suggesting that rules are there to be ignored at will. But, when a kid clearly realizes that through an innocent screw up, and they try to handle it appropriately by telling a teacher, and then they get slammed because of a pointless zero tolerance rule... All that ends up doing is telling the kid to hide the stupid, innocent mistakes. In the case of the kid with a paring knife because she ended up with her mother's lunch... All the teacher had to do was hold onto the knife (thereby keeping it out of the kids's hands), and have the girl or her mother collect it after school. In this case... it's a little different. The kid didn't turn the knife in herself. And I don't know how well the rules were explained to the girl before this happened. Assuming she knew, and blatantly disregarded them... Punish her at school. She didn't threaten anyone. She didn't assaut anyone. Did it really merit a felony prosecution?

 

[Andrew Green]

I wonder what the effect will be when these kids grow up?

Will they be drones, programmed to obey and accept rules, no matter how stupid those rules are? Or will they learn to distrust authority figures, and lose respect for the rules after seeing how stupid so many are?

Either way I figure it's going to turn out a lot of paranoid people, and personally I think we have way to many of those already.

 

[Ping898]

I'm so glad I graduated before any of this crap started.

I'm with you there....
The thing that annoys me about zero-tolerance laws is they are so reactionary usually to one or two events, that people (who develop and pass the laws or push for the laws to be passed) rarely take the time to stop and think about the consequences of what they are doing to those who have no ill-intent....

 

[Kacey]

Part of first line supervision (and teachers are first line supervisors of the kids in their classes) is knowing when to turn a blind eye to the rules.

And I have done that, on occasion... luckily for me, it hasn't come back and bit me in the butt... yet. But it has done so for people I know - including one teacher who saw a girl with a table knife she was using (along with a fork) to cut chicken she had brought for lunch. The teacher quietly told her to put the utensils away and not bring them back to school (we don't allow metal utensils of any kind - and we do supply plastic forks and spoons); unfortunately, another student got hold of them, and stabbed a third student with the fork, which was actually sharper than the knife. The student who brought the implements was suspended (part of the softening of the law - she wasn't expelled), the student who used the fork was expelled and ticketed for assault, and the teacher was dismissed from her job. I've not turned a blind eye on much since then, and certainly not on anything involving items that are considered weapons under the law, however much I might disagree with it.

 

[jks9199]

And I have done that, on occasion... luckily for me, it hasn't come back and bit me in the butt... yet. But it has done so for people I know - including one teacher who saw a girl with a table knife she was using (along with a fork) to cut chicken she had brought for lunch. The teacher quietly told her to put the utensils away and not bring them back to school (we don't allow metal utensils of any kind - and we do supply plastic forks and spoons); unfortunately, another student got hold of them, and stabbed a third student with the fork, which was actually sharper than the knife. The student who brought the implements was suspended (part of the softening of the law - she wasn't expelled), the student who used the fork was expelled and ticketed for assault, and the teacher was dismissed from her job. I've not turned a blind eye on much since then, and certainly not on anything involving items that are considered weapons under the law, however much I might disagree with it.

Perhaps "blind eye" wasn't the best phrase; you can't truly ignore the problem behavior, and you do have to accept that there may be consequences. In the case you describe, there was no need for the kid to bring utensils, and the teacher shouldn't have left them in the kid's hands. That wasn't sound discretion, anymore than it would be sound discretion on my part to let a person who's impaired, but very close to the limit (say, .08 or .09 BAC), continue to drive. What do I do then? I put the person in a cab. Note that in my examples on kids with unauthorized utensils, I didn't say leave them in the kid's hands; I said the teacher should have taken them, and returned them later. You're not exercising sound discretion if you leave the dangerous situation unchanged.

 

[Gordon Nore]

...and the teacher was dismissed from her job. I've not turned a blind eye on much since then, and certainly not on anything involving items that are considered weapons under the law, however much I might disagree with it.

This is how pathetic the situation has become. It's as if we teachers can't possibly know how to exercise good judgment in a given situation. I've only been a public school teacher for seven years, but I cannot count the number of times I've heard administrators say, CYA, "cover your assets." They're not being cynical when they say that; they're being brutally honest.