MALORI BIZZELL
THE SIGNAL
Texas Legislature passed a new policy in 2009 that enacted a “Zero-Tolerance” policy to protect students and to create a safe environment on school campuses.
In view of recent local school stabbings, this policy seems like a great idea, but the policy doesn’t allow school administrators to determine the punishment on a case-by-case basis.
Last April, my nephew was sent to alternative school and charged with a felony terroristic threat for bringing a pocket knife to school. Being expelled seems like a reasonable punishment for this offense, but being charged with making a terroristic threat does not.
My nephew is a 12-year-old who has attention deficit disorder, lives in a single-parent home, and is ignorant of the violence in schools today.
The pocket knife was a handmade birthday present from his grandfather. He brought it to school to share his excitement for his present with his classmates. He never thought of the knife as a weapon.
Bringing the knife to school was a mistake, but not a terroristic threat. Because of this mistake, my nephew will now have a felony on his permanent record.
There are numerous cases in schools where students have been expelled for such minor incidents.
One student faces a felony charge of terroristic threat for putting an alarm clock in the ceiling for it to go off in class as a joke. Definitely not funny; the teacher misunderstood the ticking sound to be a bomb. However, the student only tried the prank after witnessing another student pulling the same prank earlier in the year in another teacher’s classroom without being reprimanded.
Another example is the honor student who was expelled for having her brother’s theater sword prop in her car at school.
When does the punishment go too far and how can the students’ “crimes” all be categorized the same?
After the Spring High School stabbing Sept. 3, I understand the seriousness of having any type of weapon at school, and there should be policies in place.
Weapons should not be brought into schools and there needs to be consequences for children’s actions, but there also needs to be discretion applied to the rules and punishment assigned by schools’ administrators.
The intentions behind the act should be weighed by the administration when punishing the student because a knife can be represented differently depending on the intentions. A knife can be used as a weapon, but it can also be used as cutlery or a prop for a play. In this case, it was a prized- possession given as a gift.
The punishments and charges given to children can be extremely traumatic, especially if a child’s intention is misunderstood and does not truly mean any harm to classmates.
My nephew’s entire life will be changed by having a felony on his permanent record. This will be a hurdle to jump over when trying to get accepted into college or applying for a job.
All school campuses should have “Zero-Tolerance” policies against weapons but should not include a singular, set-in-stone punishment. The punishment should fit the offense dependent on the intention of the student because one punishment does not fit all.
A child’s life is a picture painted by every stroke from a different experience and mistakes shouldn’t be the biggest portion of the picture.
“Zero-Tolerance” policies in schools don’t necessarily give children the chance to learn from their mistakes and grow without having those mistakes follow them for the rest of their lives.
