“So, instead of just confiscating the item and confirming whether or not it presents any danger, and then upon finding it’s no danger, return it to the boy, they initiate a “zero tolerance” response?”
Which is exactly how the school handled it, if you read the article. They realized it was harmless and gave the kid a minimal sentence of silent lunch. There was no zero-tolerance response and I would have been very critical if there was.
They still “punished” him...for an object that is far less harmful than a sharpened pencil...
IDIOCY!
“They realized it was harmless and gave the kid a minimal sentence of silent lunch. There was no zero-tolerance response and I would have been very critical if there was.”
Actually, they did execute zero tolerance when they “gave the kid a minimal sentence of silent lunch” even when they KNEW it was harmless. Zero tolerance mean punishment must to applied, regardless.
When a picture of a firearm, or a pop-tart chewed into the shape of a firearm, initiates zero tolerance better not bring a Massachusetts quarter to school: https://www.littletoncoin.com/LCC/html/images/4412-wc.jpg
