Extra, Extra, read all about it!!
School Board Bans Oregano
Cafeterias face glut of catsup and horsemeat
And then the empties are used to make extremely uncomfortable starter brassieres.
So this isn’t just a drugs story, it’s a sex and drugs story! Film at 11.
The disturbing aspect of the follow-up article is that the suspension will stand whether or not the jell-o was found to contain booze. Their look a like law has more holes than fine swiss cheese. Do they ban apples, oranges, and other fruits because someone with an insulin syringe made them alcoh-perky?
If* Mom sent her kid to school with spiked shots, she’s a total butthead. If the shots are clean, than I call no hurt, no foul.
The above opinion requires application of common sense, which is increasingly less common.
Okay, so the school suspended the student for having a “look alike drug” and the kids mother was exhorting the kid to sell jello shots at school to raise money for Christmas? Two more reasons for me to be glad I’m homeschooling! :rolleyes:
Also, if the mother was actually inviting her kid to sell booze at school, wouldn’t it make more sense to do something to the mother than to the kid? Oh, yeah, it would make more sense, which sorta explains why it wasn’t done that way.
When I was young, we made our jello shots with everclear.
Don’t try this at home, kids.
So, which story has it right?
This reminds me of the time my elementary school banned Pixie Stix because someone dumped a couple into a baggie when the straws broke, and a teacher thought it looked like coke.
Did I mention said kid was in second grade? :smack:
No more brownies at bake sales either.
The story is bizarre, but the school’s actions are still ridiculous. I’m not sure what the supposed justification for punishing students for possessing drug look-alikes, but if it’s based on the notion that it promotes drug use, I doubt many elementary school students know what a Jell-O shot is. And now testing the girl for drug use? What a load of bullshit.
I can’t understand what makes people support zero-tolerance laws of any sort.
The way I read the additional info, there were tests showing the items were “clean”, BUT it seems that the mother was making non-alcoholic “homemade” plain-old-Jello-cups, but had made them to look like Jello-shots, and enlistied the kid, who was aware of that, in a sale scheme.
So even if there was no invitation to “sell booze”, mama would have still been manipulating the child into selling a lookalike to a banned product. So I would say it was the MOTHER , not the child who was guilty of “lookalike drug” -mongering. The child probably thought it was just a hoot, after all, it’s just plain Jello, it’s make-believe! (just like “bang, bang, you’re dead”… no, wait, that HAS been censored under ZT in some places! :smack: ) However, since the school does not have authority over the mother…
But, I would have thought that by now in virtually every district, distribution-for-sale of ANY food, however innocuous, would require prior school permission (for health and liability reasons). Had I been in authority, I would have intervened quickli just in case it were really Jello shots, but upon confirming their true nature I would have taken sanctions for violating the rogue-food rule, and had mama sit down with one of the counselors for a nice long chat about how come she keeps her 8-year-old abreast of trends in bartending.
It’s easier than the alternative, to wit, “thinking.”
Hell, I’d ban Pixi Stix if only because I wouldn’t want to have deal with all those kids hepped up on sugar. Those things are kiddie crack!
I suddenly realise where the name zero tolerance comes from. “Three strikes and you’re out” = “citizen arrested or expelled for breaking the law three times” so logically “zero tolerance” = “citizen arrested or expelled for not breaking the law at all”
I guess calling it “Randomly arresting law abiding citizens with things that superficially sound like reasons” wouldn’t get it voted it :rolleyes:
It’s a way for school administrators to hand out punishments without serious consequences (that is - until something ridiculous like the OP happens and gets publicized). If a parent complains, they can just say “uh-uh-uh…we have a zero tolerance policy!”
Shhhh, you’ll give them ideas.
[sub]I’m frankly surprised that jello cups are forbidden but those dangerous pointy weapons we call pencils are actually allowed.[/sub]
From the second article;
From the way the article reads, this goes for whether the Jello contained alcohol or not. If it does, I hope the mother tells them to go fuck themselves. Maybe they should spend more time thinking about the ridiculous “zero-tolerance” policy and less time worring about look-alike jello shots.
Btw, how does somebody make single servings of jello without them looking like jello shots?
Peace - DESK
People tell me teachers have to react this way becaues children aren’t as innocent as they used to be.
I tell them they have their cause and effect reversed.
I usually get a blank stare in response…
Pencils? Hell, we had compasses! You could put someone’s eye out with one of those things!
Well, when I make individual servings of jello, they’re approximately four ounce servings; when my sister brings jello shots to family parties, they’re maybe two ounces; she makes them in the little plastic cups that Little Cesar’s Pizza gives out marinara sauce and such for dipping (it helps that she works for Little Cesar’s Pizza).
I’ve also seen them done in the little paper condiment cups that McDs and Burger King use. So I guess the main difference, AFAICT, is serving size.
Of course, it also may be worth mentioning that she brings the same things for the kids, but without the alcohol. She just puts little stickers on the caps on the kid’s cups.
I’m so ashamed to admit this…
I watch Jerry Springer. (But so does my gramma!)
And I have learned that chairs and shoes are viable weapons.
Zero tolerance? Padded, empty rooms full of barefoot kids.
But there’s still those pesky fists and feet…
What to do, what to do.
Well, the first thing we do is to develop zero-tolerance laws against sleazy talk-shows. 