NationStates Jolt Archive

To avoid a hijack in another thread, this admittedly interesting topic can be explored here. There are various laws and policies in place in schools throughout the US, Canada, and elsewhere that are labelled 'zero tolerance'. How each law or policy works will vary. So perhaps we could actually look at specific examples and discuss their effectiveness or lack thereof, and any other issues that might arise...

The Education Act in Ontario has this zero tolerance policy across all school boards in the province:



309. (1) It is mandatory that a pupil be expelled if the pupil commits any of the following infractions while he or she is at school or is engaged in a school-related activity:

1. Possessing a weapon, including possessing a firearm.

2. Using a weapon to cause or to threaten bodily harm to another person.

3. Committing physical assault on another person that causes bodily harm requiring treatment by a medical practitioner.

4. Committing sexual assault.

5. Trafficking in weapons or in illegal drugs.

6. Committing robbery.

7. Giving alcohol to a minor.

8. Engaging in another activity that, under a policy of the board, is one for which expulsion is mandatory.


However, let it be noted that Ontario is planning to scrap (http://www.thestar.com/News/article/201456) this policy.

So what are your opinions on zero tolerance policies?

Yeah, let's ruin somebody's life for consuming alcahol when they "shouldn't" be! Better yet, let's just not give anybody a chance anymore, and make school shootings even more likely. Well, you know that this is the best idea ever, right?

That said, Zero Tolerance policies are complete idiocy. Another social distortion (pun not intended) for which we can thank the mind-fucked Baby Boomer generation.

I agree with pretty much everything on that list of offences. Apart from the alcohol.

I agree with pretty much everything on that list of offences. Apart from the alcohol.

You brush up against a female student who makes a big deal about it...oooh, cooties, or something similar.

Sexual assault?

Enough under the zero tolerance policy to get you expelled if anyone wanted to.

You're a dumb kid who brings in a can of that .05% beer, thinking it's a pop and give it to a friend

Mandatory expulsion.

Grade one kids playing on the playground. One boy runs past and knocks over another boy who gets a bleeding nose. Physical assault requiring medical attention. Bye bye kid.

Reasonable? There is no room for discretion with zero tolerance policies.

You brush up against a female student who makes a big deal about it...oooh, cooties, or something similar.

Sexual assault?

Enough under the zero tolerance policy to get you expelled if anyone wanted to.

You're a dumb kid who brings in a can of that .05% beer, thinking it's a pop and give it to a friend

Mandatory expulsion.

Grade one kids playing on the playground. One boy runs past and knocks over another boy who gets a bleeding nose. Physical assault requiring medical attention. Bye bye kid.

Reasonable? There is no room for discretion with zero tolerance policies.

Okay, well in the examples you've given, it's incredibly ridiculous, yes. But it's completely under the interpretation of the school administrators. In your examples, the administrators are complete morons. Zero tolerance works if you have the competence to be able to see what actually qualifies as an expulsible offence.

I agree with pretty much everything on that list of offences. Apart from the alcohol.

That should simply be a suspension offense. Expelling someone for that is not appropriate in the slightest. Why a school would want to ruin someones future because they took a drink is beyond me. Then again, when schools expel someone for bringing a butter knife to school, calling it a "weapon" who knows what they are thinking?

Okay, well in the examples you've given, it's incredibly ridiculous, yes. But it's completely under the interpretation of the school administrators. In your examples, the administrators are complete morons. Zero tolerance works if you have the competence to be able to see what actually qualifies as an expulsible offence.

Zero Tolerance doesn't work, simply because it allows those things to happen. Administrators aren't immortal, and even if they were, they're likely to change their minds every now and then...

good:
punishes those who bring guns and/or illegal drugs to school.

bad:
there have been cases where saving an asthmatic's life with an inhaler has been considered "drug trafficing", enough for expulsion. So, if you don't save the life, you're a selfish asshole. If you do, you're a drug dealer. Kinda a catch 22. Either way, you're is big trouble.

Zero Tolerance = Zero Brains.

1. Possessing a weapon.
2. Using a weapon
3. Committing physical assault
4. Committing sexual assault.
5. Trafficking in weapons or in illegal drugs.
6. Committing robbery.
etc
I say give them a second chance, they dont know what they are doing, they are victims of the fascist Teachers. [/sarcasm]

Wait now. Does this apply to elementary or high school? Which one are we talking about?

I think "zero-tolerance", "automatic expulsion" and other such notions defy the nature of school, and youth. Any child, from any background, with any amount of potential, can be induced into bringing alcohol or a knife into school through peer pressure or emotional distress, yet this does not immediately render them irremediable criminals for life.

I defy the will of anybody who contends that children do not merit a second chance.

Expulsion =/= ruining of future. At least not in england.

Zero tolerance was designed so that school administrators wouldn't have to make real decisions.

Expulsion =/= ruining of future. At least not in england.

I disagree. Most universities of any standard would be unwilling to admit a previously expelled candidate, and any such expulsion will have an equally malign effect upon any application for a job of any great magnitude.

I would imagine that, though expulsion does not necessarily ruin one's future, it does do so for the majority.

I disagree. Most universities of any standard would be unwilling to admit a previously expelled candidate, and any such expulsion will have an equally malign effect upon any application for a job of any great magnitude.


I'm not sure thats the case.


I would imagine that, though expulsion does not necessarily ruin one's future, it does do so for the majority.

But theres more of a chance, under the threat of expulsion that someone will not fuck his life up while he is in school and ruin his future anyway.

Anyway schools here don't like expelling people, they always try to avoid it because they have to pay around £5000 every time. I think thats a better deterrent.

I agree with pretty much everything on that list of offences. Apart from the alcohol.

Here's an interesting story - a true one, at that. A straight-A Eagle Scout who has never had any trouble at school goes on a camping trip (with the Boy Scouts) one weekend. He gets back late on Sunday and goes straight to bed, so he doesn't unpack everything from the trunk of his car. He goes to school the next day and there is a lock-down with random searches. They search his car. In the trunk, with much of the rest of his camping gear, is a hatchet. The school, by a zero tolerance policy, is supposed to expel this student for possessing a weapon at school. However, he didn't bring it on purpose, did not pull it out of his vehicle, and was not showing it around. There is absolutely no reason to believe that he is a danger to other students, teachers, etc.

Here's another: A little girl's mother packs her lunch. She has some sort of spread, so the mother includes a butter knife in with her lunch. The butter knife is a knife with a blade long enough to be considered a weapon, so she is supposed to be expelled.

And so on and so forth...

Zero tolerance polices don't leave teachers or administrators room to look at a situation and see if it is really the type of situation meant to be covered by the rule. Now, there are some on that list that I can't think of any extenuating circumstances for - or any way that they could be done accidentally - but that doesn't mean that such circumstances do not exist.

Okay, well in the examples you've given, it's incredibly ridiculous, yes. But it's completely under the interpretation of the school administrators. In your examples, the administrators are complete morons. Zero tolerance works if you have the competence to be able to see what actually qualifies as an expulsible offence.

There is no room to "be able to see what actually qualifies..." The rules state the expulsible offenses. Teachers and administrators are given no room to make any decisions actually based upon the examples in the case.

To avoid a hijack in another thread, this admittedly interesting topic can be explored here. There are various laws and policies in place in schools throughout the US, Canada, and elsewhere that are labelled 'zero tolerance'. How each law or policy works will vary. So perhaps we could actually look at specific examples and discuss their effectiveness or lack thereof, and any other issues that might arise...

The Education Act in Ontario has this zero tolerance policy across all school boards in the province:
...

So what are your opinions on zero tolerance policies?
Zero tolerance is just a euphemism for zero thought, zero decision, and zero responsibility. Congratulations to Ontario for giving it's administrators and teachers some credit for intelligent decision making. Congratulations to the teachers and administrators for seizing the decision making responsibility that should have been theirs all along.

disclaimer: Dammit, I'm not a liberal. They're just right sometimes.

I'm not sure thats the case.

I daresay it would depend upon the nature of the offence, and any extenuating circumstances, however, the stigma of expulsion is not easy to overcome. Anecdotal though this is, a friend of mine a few years above from me was expelled for possession of cannabis, and his since been unable to gaina place at university.



But theres more of a chance, under the threat of expulsion that someone will not fuck his life up while he is in school and ruin his future anyway.

Anyway schools here don't like expelling people, they always try to avoid it because they have to pay around £5000 every time. I think thats a better deterrent.

That is a fair point. However, I was referring more to those who are impressionable or vulnerable and thus make a mistake at some point, quite out of character.

I wasn't aware it cost money to expel a pupil.... how odd.:confused:

That is a fair point. However, I was referring more to those who are impressionable or vulnerable and thus make a mistake at some point, quite out of character.

I wasn't aware it cost money to expel a pupil.... how odd.:confused:

Well thats what i've been told, but it could be false.

Anyway I don't care if they scrap the zero tollerance idea, as long as they at least lie to the kids and say that you will get expelled. Threat of expulsion is what got me working.

the zero tolerance policy in my high school meant I got suspended for having my own prescription medication on me (one pill that had to be taken at lunch, that really wasn't abusable at all)

and also, they took away my ink pen. :mad:

I think it's a bunch of BS if you ask me.

the zero tolerance policy in my high school meant I got suspended for having my own prescription medication on me (one pill that had to be taken at lunch, that really wasn't abusable at all)

and also, they took away my ink pen. :mad:

I think it's a bunch of BS if you ask me.

Really? I wasn't aware that he american teachers would try to be so pointlessly consistent. In that case i've changed my mind.

the zero tolerance policy in my high school meant I got suspended for having my own prescription medication on me (one pill that had to be taken at lunch, that really wasn't abusable at all)

and also, they took away my ink pen. :mad:

I think it's a bunch of BS if you ask me.

Why would they take away your ink pen?

Why would they take away your ink pen?

it was a Prozac pen, I collect drug promotional items, and apparently my Prozac pen was "drug paraphernalia" :mad:

Administrators aren't immortal, and even if they were, they're likely to change their minds every now and then...

What!!?? Administrators AREN'T immortal? You mean they DON'T live forever!?

WHO KNEW!!!??:eek:

Wait now. Does this apply to elementary or high school? Which one are we talking about?

Both.

To avoid a hijack in another thread, this admittedly interesting topic can be explored here. There are various laws and policies in place in schools throughout the US, Canada, and elsewhere that are labelled 'zero tolerance'. How each law or policy works will vary. So perhaps we could actually look at specific examples and discuss their effectiveness or lack thereof, and any other issues that might arise...

The Education Act in Ontario has this zero tolerance policy across all school boards in the province:



309. (1) It is mandatory that a pupil be expelled if the pupil commits any of the following infractions while he or she is at school or is engaged in a school-related activity:

1. Possessing a weapon, including possessing a firearm.

2. Using a weapon to cause or to threaten bodily harm to another person.

3. Committing physical assault on another person that causes bodily harm requiring treatment by a medical practitioner.

4. Committing sexual assault.

5. Trafficking in weapons or in illegal drugs.

6. Committing robbery.

7. Giving alcohol to a minor.

8. Engaging in another activity that, under a policy of the board, is one for which expulsion is mandatory.


However, let it be noted that Ontario is planning to scrap (http://www.thestar.com/News/article/201456) this policy.

So what are your opinions on zero tolerance policies?

Zero tolerance: Idiocy

All of the above require some circumstantial evaluation, but some of these are worse than others.

2/3: No self-defense allowed?
4: Does this apply to four year olds, etc?
7: Umm... where to begin?
8: Too vague

it was a Prozac pen, I collect drug promotional items, and apparently my Prozac pen was "drug paraphernalia" :mad:

Ok. I'm going to go ahead and assume that you administrators were dealing with a bit of their own drug paraphernalia at the time. And probably a bit too much of it.

When someone bitches about something, I always ask,

"Well did someone get shot?"

"Uh...no."

"Ok, did anyone get stabbed?"

"No"

"Then I think we're ok."

Same rules apply to the Zero Tolerance Policy. Unless something really bad happens, just suspend them or make them do community service, etc.

Zero tolerance is just a euphemism for zero thought, zero decision, and zero responsibility. Congratulations to Ontario for giving it's administrators and teachers some credit for intelligent decision making. Congratulations to the teachers and administrators for seizing the decision making responsibility that should have been theirs all along.

disclaimer: Dammit, I'm not a liberal. They're just right sometimes.

Stop doing that! You're ruining my image of you as the crusty old sarcastic conservative of NSG.

Zero tolerance is just a euphemism for zero thought, zero decision, and zero responsibility. Congratulations to Ontario for giving it's administrators and teachers some credit for intelligent decision making. Congratulations to the teachers and administrators for seizing the decision making responsibility that should have been theirs all along.

disclaimer: Dammit, I'm not a liberal. They're just right sometimes.

QFT

as for the disclaimer: Just say something random that a liberal would never say and you are good.

For example, "GO guns!" will do wonders. :)

I was called up to the administrator's office for stabbing someone once, back in the second grade.

I was bending a paperclip into an animal silhouette or something, and another kid tried to grab it and stuck his hand on the end of the paperclip.

Lucky for me that the school didn't have a zero-tolerance policy, eh?

Well, I'd have been hooped if my school had a zero tolerance policy. I drank in class on a number of ocassions, I smoked drugs at school and I was in fights from grade 2 on. I'd have been expelled permanently and would never have graduated with top marks, and gone on to become a teacher, and then to study law.

Kind of scary to think what I'd be doing if I HAD been kicked out.

So yeah, I think kids deserve a chance. Many chances in fact.

Alright, what bastard created a thread where everyone agrees.

Um, zero tolerance is awesome. Children should be abandoned at the first sign of trouble. I think we should require similar policies in the home. Let's get those punks on the streets where they belong.

Alright, what bastard created a thread where everyone agrees.

Um, zero tolerance is awesome. Children should be abandoned at the first sign of trouble. I think we should require similar policies in the home. Let's get those punks on the streets where they belong.

I apparently started one as well......everyone loves John Edwards.

Yeah, this thread sucks. No controversy.

A zero-tolerance policy is too inflexible.

Argh! Adults these days always think that kids are the worst. They'll stereotype all of us as Columbine shooters and give us trouble that we don't deserve! Punishment first, ask questions later? What type of crappy policy is that?

Yeah, this thread sucks. No controversy.

Why? Because no one is supporting zero tolerance? ;)

Why? Because no one is supporting zero tolerance? ;)

Surely someone has a solid black & white viewpoint?

Well, I'd have been hooped if my school had a zero tolerance policy. I drank in class on a number of ocassions, I smoked drugs at school and I was in fights from grade 2 on. I'd have been expelled permanently and would never have graduated with top marks, and gone on to become a teacher, and then to study law.

Kind of scary to think what I'd be doing if I HAD been kicked out.

So yeah, I think kids deserve a chance. Many chances in fact.
In the early '70s, it was nothing to have student smoking lounges, open campus, late arrivals, and early releases. And the drinking age had been at 18 for 3.2% beer forever. Many lunches during my senior year were spent with a couple friends and a bucket-o-beer at one of the local bars. A lot of us turned out okay, too.

Just to reiterate, zero-tolerance policies are just crutches for administrators and teachers that don't want to take responsibility for their decisions.

I smoked drugs at school

Whoa. Smoking Vicodin must be some trippy shit.

Whoa. Smoking Vicodin must be some trippy shit.

Na, I was rolling up instant coffee and puffing on it. Nice taste.

Na, I was rolling up instant coffee and puffing on it. Nice taste.

Bit bitter, to be honest.

Na, I was rolling up instant coffee and puffing on it. Nice taste.

Instant coffee? Do you mean to tell me that you didn't take the time to grind your own beans and do it the right way?

I shall shun you now.

Instant coffee? Do you mean to tell me that you didn't take the time to grind your own beans and do it the right way?

I shall shun you now.

It was Nescafe...come on now...

And truly...real ground coffee doesn't actually burn like instant does.

But, you have to at least make the effort! Add some lighter fluid or something, damnit!

*kicks*

Too much effort. Easier to sniff glue.

It was Nescafe...come on now...

And truly...real ground coffee doesn't actually burn like instant does.

But, you have to at least make the effort! Add some lighter fluid or something, damnit!

*kicks*

zero tolerance = infinite stupidy. 'nuff said.

Too much effort. Easier to sniff glue.

Yeah, but you could wind up getting Lymphoma like Joey Ramone did, and that's not a good way to go down...

...How about, er, peyote? :p

The thing is, I think the logical part of the brain instead of the part of your brain that goes "OH MY FUCKING GOD WE ARE SO FUCKING FUCKED!!!" needs to make policy. If the average person's reaction to what someone did is "Okay, that's not really a good idea." or "You really should knock that off" or something, it's probably worth a detention. On the other hand, if the average person's reaction is "OH MY FUCKING GOD! TRAGEDY! DOOM! DEATH! DESTRUCTION! THE DREAM IS OVER!", we may want to start looking towards something a little harsher. For example, drinking a little (Unless it's off school grounds, in which case it's none of their fucking business.) might be worth a detention, whereas psychically breaking into your fellow students minds and making them forget who their parents are and where they live, and, actually, who they are, may be worth a short suspension.

The point of growing up is to learn from your mistakes. If one mistake fucks your life forever, we CANNOT grow up, nor mature. Being afraid to make your own decisions will give us a nation of giant children. As opposed to a nation that's only RULED by giant children.

You know, the entire "zero-tolerance policy" wouldn't be so bad if they didn't try to brand the phrase into our highly maleable brains from day one.

2/3: No self-defense allowed?

I don't know about the schools in Ontario, but that was true in my school. I was very scared there. Very very scared.

Being afraid to make your own decisions will give us a nation of giant children. As opposed to a nation that's only RULED by giant children.

You win the thread!

Yeah, let's ruin somebody's life for consuming alcahol when they "shouldn't" be! Better yet, let's just not give anybody a chance anymore, and make school shootings even more likely. Well, you know that this is the best idea ever, right?

That said, Zero Tolerance policies are complete idiocy. Another social distortion (pun not intended) for which we can thank the mind-fucked Baby Boomer generation.

yea I don't think you should consume alcohol while at school...It's kind of...a bad idea..

Zero tolerance is idiocy. My school has zero-tolerance on drugs and violence, doesn't stop anything. Doesn't "deter" people. Simply just another rule to break, only with harsher consequences.

You win the thread!

Wow, I think this is the first time someone has won a thread for making a point instead of a joke.

Wow, I think this is the first time someone has won a thread for making a point instead of a joke.

It was both, so it seemed appropriate. ^_^

I don't know about the schools in Ontario, but that was true in my school. I was very scared there. Very very scared.

Fuck that.

What, are the kids supposed to just lay there and 'take it'?

yea I don't think you should consume alcohol while at school...It's kind of...a bad idea..

Arguably, I think the only difference between your standard teenager and your drunk standard teenager would be that one does things slower.

Fuck that.

What, are the kids supposed to just lay there and 'take it'?

Wow...there's just so many jokes I can make...

Fuck that.

What, are the kids supposed to just lay there and 'take it'?

At the school I went to? Yep. We were supposed to just lay there and take it until someone else went to the office and got a school administrator who was supposed to handle it. Didn't matter if the person was going to, in fact, kill us before then.

At the school I went to? Yep. We were supposed to just lay there and take it until someone else went to the office and got a school administrator who was supposed to handle it. Didn't matter if the person was going to, in fact, kill us before then.

So, let's say the offender had an ax...

You were supposed to just get killed? :confused: :mad: :upyours:

Fuck that.

What, are the kids supposed to just lay there and 'take it'?

Not at my school. We have enough rednecks and uber-athlete stars here who could probably kill somebody before the administrators got there. That, and people are effing retarded anyway.

In BC Zero Tolerance doesn't mean zero tolerance as the whole no marijuana thing should get you expelled but in reality only results in a bad trip to the principal's office.

Zero tolerance is bullcrap. Luckily, at my school, it is not practiced as we have an effective and capable administrator.

So, let's say the offender had an ax...

You were supposed to just get killed? :confused: :mad: :upyours:

Technically speaking, yes.
Must of us would have gone "screw Zero Tolerance" and defended ourselves anyway. And the administration probably would have put Zero Tolerance aside. But I remember having to listen to the administration explain that if we were attacked, we were not to fight back. Hence why I was scared.

Technically speaking, yes.

WHAT???!!!!


Must of us would have gone "screw Zero Tolerance" and defended ourselves anyway. And the administration probably would have put Zero Tolerance aside.

That's good, I guess.

But I remember having to listen to the administration explain that if we were attacked, we were not to fight back. Hence why I was scared.

I'd be pissed at that guy for thinking anyone would be dumb enough to listen to that. Quite insulting, really.

WHAT???!!!!

That's good, I guess.

I'd be pissed at that guy for thinking anyone would be dumb enough to listen to that. Quite insulting, really.

Now serving: a new post
Full of 100% agreement.

I think people who are against self-defense need to live in their own little communities, not bothering us. Like the Amish.

I think people who are against self-defense need to live in their own little communities, not bothering us. Like the Amish.

Maybe these administrators who are against self-defense are Amish...?

Maybe these administrators who are against self-defense are Amish...?

:p

Seriously, though, unlikely.

:p

Seriously, though, unlikely.

Just think about it for a minute. They like to impose strict rules on everybody under their domain. They promote a zero-tolerance policy, and expel anybody who breaks the rules.

They're secretly Amish. You know it.

yea I don't think you should consume alcohol while at school...It's kind of...a bad idea..

I've done it, not enough to get me seriously drunk (enough to make concentrating horrible) and definitly not something I should get expelled for. Detention? Sure but I don't think it's serious.

Just think about it for a minute. They like to impose strict rules on everybody under their domain. They promote a zero-tolerance policy, and expel anybody who breaks the rules.

They're secretly Amish. You know it.

Inbreeding could be an explanation for this stupidity.