I have a client at work who lives in New Ken and brings a box of treats from Oakmont Bakery whenever she stops in.
Along the lines of totin’ chips, maybe medical marijuana cards could be replaced with tokin’ chips. Mmmmmm, French onion dip.
I have a client at work who lives in New Ken and brings a box of treats from Oakmont Bakery whenever she stops in.
Along the lines of totin’ chips, maybe medical marijuana cards could be replaced with tokin’ chips. Mmmmmm, French onion dip.
This is a weird middle ground that solves a non-problem; schools traditionally didn’t worry about pocketknives, and some still don’t (or have something like ‘anything under 3" is OK’ as a rule). I don’t see that the ‘totin chip’ idea really helps with either major philosophy that people follow (‘no knives’ or ‘pocket knives are no big deal’), I don’t think that ‘pocket knives are really dangerous but we need kids to have them in school’ is a thing that very many people actually push for, and it doesn’t work as a compromise position. For schools that don’t want kids to have pocketknives, whether for liability reasons, because their board or state thinks “OMG it’s a weapon”, or they just don’t like them, they simply don’t want them in school. They have no reason to move to a partial ban, because there isn’t some compelling need for pocket knives in school; adding this system runs counter to their goal. For schools that don’t think it’s a big deal, they can follow tradition and ditch any rules against pocket knives entirely and treat them as no big deal. Adding a whole special system that teachers need to track and be trained on and treating pocket knives as something that needs Special Procedures runs counter to their goal of treating knives like an ordinary tool that they’re not worried about.
Just this morning I asked my son if he wanted to take an orange with him for lunch and he said he couldn’t peel it. I said “just bring a kni… oh, well, yogurt it is, then.”
How is that different from any other food item that you prepare at home? Peel it and throw it in a little container or a baggie.
This is the sort of things my students say to me, and I scowl at them, and say, “So, how are you going to solve this problem?”
We’re not talking major problems here.
Start it with your teeth, then use your fingernails. It isn’t hard.
Or use a loose-rind citrus, like a clementine.
Yeah, I’ve never had a problem peeling an orange with my hands, fingernails or no, but apparently he does. It was right as we were walking out the door, so I didn’t have time to prepare it for him. I realize now that the post I replied to was talking about major problems and peeling an orange isn’t one. But still, it’s one of many instances where a small knife would have been helpful in school. Certainly there are other ways to solve that particular problem, but there are many ways to solve most problems. That doesn’t mean a knife isn’t still quite handy, even if you can peel your food with your teeth, and clean your shoes with a stick, and open envelopes with your fingers, and cut loose threads with scissors, etc.
I’m not sure that anyone really disputes that.
Use a plastic knife from the cafeteria?
Depending on the age of the child that might, in fact, be some major decision making. Which is all the more reason to get them started. Kids need problem-solving skills and this is just the sort of thing that helps them develop those skills.
For whatever it’s worth, draconian zero-tolerance policies seem more the exception than the rule. A kid wouldn’t be disciplined at my school if they plausibly had a knife on them they forgot about. And a first grader brought a loaded gun to my son’s elementary school a few years ago (before he was there) and they didn’t discipline her at all, because she had no idea what it was. They called the cops to investigate the home, of course, and I imagine there were criminal charges. So while I am sure there are over-zealous administrators out there penalizing boys for making guns out of sticks, it’s not inevitable.
Spring for a quartet of these?
Hell, I have a half-dozen or so of them in my desk to loan to kids eating lunch in my room.
I now see five solutions:
I woulda taken the yogurt.
Draconian they may be, but about 75% of schools still have zero-tolerance policies. Does your son attend a private school? Public schools must comply with the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1994, which mandates a one-year expulsion of students bringing guns to school, no exceptions (hence the zero in zero tolerance). Private schools don’t receive federal funds, so have a lot more latitude.
Do you have a cite for this? Not saying you’re wrong, but this is the Straight Dope, and I gotta ask.
Darn, I meant to include the cite but forgot. The 75% figure is for general Zero Tolerance policies, including drugs. If you’re looking at ZTP’s for weapons other than firearms, it’s 91%. There are several cites for the 75% figure, so here’s one that gives the stats for weapons and drugs.
You know, I honestly can’t remember having knives at my high school cafeteria, but I also can’t remember not having them. Same with grade school.
Besides, I’ve always used a spoon to peel oranges. Not that it really matters, I suppose.
A meandering, go-nowhere post in a meandering, go-nowhere thread.
Okay, but looking at the original source, the most recent direct cite is 17 years old. The reason I asked is because I thought these policies had fallen out of favor. I’ve been poking around, and I’m not finding more recent stats. This article, from 2015, discusses the general move away from zero tolerance.
It isn’t and shouldn’t be. There’s simply no critical reason that a school kid must have a knife in school. All those things mentioned in this thread are problems that are easily solved—absent any undue burden—without letting kids carry their own knives. There is simply no problem that demands to be solved by permitting kids to possess personal knives.
I know my son’s school is public and I know the student had a real loaded gun . . .That part was in the paper. I was told by the faculty she wasn’t punished and that they treated it as a sign of potential abuse/neglect, not an infraction. . I suppose that part could be a lie, but why would they cover up an expulsion?