Pretend bows-and-arrows and a kinder society

[Tsuga]

Zero tolerance is not kindness and punishment for PRETEND battle play is stupid.

 

Our schools technically have zero tolerance but in reality they are much more compassionate and parents get called if a child "accidentally" brings a weapon (hunting or pocket knife, nerf gun, arrow from now and arrow set, etc.).

 

That happened to a girl at my daughter's school last year. She was seven and decided to show everyone her family's camping knife. I got a call from the principal about my daughter who had been playing with the kids when one boy threatened to take the knife and poke somebody with it. Keep in mind the kids are all seven so they know better but still are learning. They just called us all and sent a flier that reminded us to talk to the kids about weapons in school.

[poppy]

There was nothing melodramatic about the headline. The parent seemed pretty rational to me and even praised the principal. I suppose I'm just getting sucked into the media's supposed "hysteria."

Kid suspended for doing something normal kids do - parent only one interviewed and he sounds very reasonable. Not news, no background, no other interviews, no context. It's something to make the reader feel smarter than whoever that idiot in the school is.

[SKL]

Kid suspended for doing something normal kids do - parent only one interviewed and he sounds very reasonable. Not news, no background, no other interviews, no context. It's something to make the reader feel smarter than whoever that idiot in the school is.

 

The news story did include quotes from the principal's later letter to all parents.  Assuming the principal quote is real, that by itself is problematic.

 

Do you not think that in general, there is problem in the US with young kids being suspended for things that could be handled in better ways?

[IfIOnly]

Yeah, one of my kids has said she wants to be a police officer.  She is a very peaceful, mellow person.  Her sister, however, is against it because it is not a very safe occupation.

 

I understand there are religious reasons why some people opt out.  I think the school in this case is Catholic.  And I think it is fine if they don't want kids playing mock violent superhero games, and they can try to teach that.  But a suspension doesn't seem to be the way to do it IMO.

 

 

It isn't a safe occupation. As far as it being dangerous though, as a parent, I encourage my kids to look at the pros and cons.  My son and I have had talks about how careers affect family life. I encourage them to take that into consideration when choosing, including the income potential of a job. Ultimately though, they have do something day in and day out for the rest of their life. My son who is interested in police work is also a high adventure kid. He would get so bored at a desk job. He likes action and people interaction. He is an extreme extrovert and genuinely cares for people. I don't know what the future holds, but I have to let him make those choices regardless of my fear for his safety. He's a smart kid and will figure it out. 

 

ETA: We've also talked about how power can corrupt. Honestly, that is my biggest concern for a child going into police work. But, you could say that about a lot of fields of work. Doctors, dentists, etc. I read some sad stuff about people abusing their position in other people's lives.

[SKL]

And yes, I've been the skeptic plenty of times.  Often I'll see a story and think, hmm, I could see how a person could be doing that in a hurtful way.  I saw the hugging story headline this morning and my thought was, hmm, there's hugging and then there's grabbing someone who doesn't want to be grabbed.  I was bullied at 13 and most of it was done in ways to appear "friendly" from a distance.

 

I still feel there is a disturbing discipine trend that is counterproductive to building a kinder society.

[poppy]

The news story did include quotes from the principal's later letter to all parents. Assuming the principal quote is real, that by itself is problematic.

 

Do you not think that in general, there is problem in the US with young kids being suspended for things that could be handled in better ways?

Ah , I read the first article linked. The second one contains one line from a letter saying violence is not tolerated.

Still skeptical here. Why just that one line? What was the context? Who reported the incident? Was it a pattern ? Were there verbal threats?

 

I general I don't think suspension matters much , but I am absolutely sure it is mishandled sometimes. I don't know any authority relations (principle , politician, parent, police) that is complete my perfect .

[SKL]

Apparently this isn't the first such incident...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/12/parents-boy-10-suspended-for-pretending-to-fire-pretend-bow-and-arrow-want/

 

When my sister was in 3rd grade, she made a pretend bow and arrow with sticks and thread.  She thought it was very funny to pretend to point it at the teacher when she turned her back to write on the borard.  Another student told the teacher.  The teacher confiscated the "weapon," asked "does this enchant you?" and then broke it and threw it in the garbage.  And moved on with the day.

[SKL]

This is the quote I keep seeing from the principal's letter.  I wouldn't characterize this as merely saying violence is not tolerated.

 

“I have no tolerance for any real, pretend, or imitated violence. The punishment is an out of school suspension,†the letter said
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/1st-grader-shoots-pretend-arrow-suspended/#PoEgT9KYVuDuoHWH.99

[vonfirmath]

I didn't see that story but I did see one this morning where a middle school student received detention for hugging

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/11/04/florida-eighth-grader-gets-detention-for-hugging-a-friend/

 

I can see where this might happen. WIth a kid who has repeatedly been told to stop hugging people -- but does it anyway.  We've been working on this with our son since Kindergarten and it still happens on occasion.

[*lifeoftheparty*]

That's a good question. If they were, say, a Mennonite school, the answer would almost certainly be yes. I know I would strongly discourage my child from joining either.

Thank goodness all parents don't do this!

 

With no one to protect us, we'd belong to China!

[SKL]

I don't agree that suspension doesn't matter much.  Aside from preventing kids from socializing, learning, and from getting credit for their work, it forces parents to miss work or find emergency child care.  In higher grades, it can have a big impact on the child's future.

 

Also, each time discipline is administered, it sends a message to all of the kids in the school.  A suspension says "we exclude people who don't conform.  We don't like them, we don't want to see them.  We avoid dealing in person with people who make our lives complicated.  Isolation is a great way to handle conflict."  and, "this is far preferable to a world where kids pretend to use imaginary weapons."

[SKL]

Well, I think I am muddling my own message.

 

I understand the thinking behind telling a 4yo we don't pretend to shoot each other.  I understand re-directing and explaining we need to be kind and that will make it a better world.

 

I am all in favor of encouraging kids to be kind to each other.  The more kindness, the better.

 

I also feel that isolating other people is not a kindness to them and has limited benefit to the others in the group - unless said person is seriously out of control.  As in, having him in the group is an objective risk to the others.

 

Interestingly, we aren't allowed to exclude children who have documentation proving that they cannot help acting in ways that appear violent or risky - unless they are actually physically threatening or hurting another child.  And I understand the logic behind that as well.

[poppy]

I don't agree that suspension doesn't matter much.  Aside from preventing kids from socializing, learning, and from getting credit for their work, it forces parents to miss work or find emergency child care.  In higher grades, it can have a big impact on the child's future.

 

Also, each time discipline is administered, it sends a message to all of the kids in the school.  A suspension says "we exclude people who don't conform.  We don't like them, we don't want to see them.  We avoid dealing in person with people who make our lives complicated.  Isolation is a great way to handle conflict."  and, "this is far preferable to a world where kids pretend to use imaginary weapons."

 

My answer was in context to your question: 'Do you not think that in general, there is problem in the US with young kids being suspended for things that could be handled in better ways?'  It seems like a trick question, because "there is never a better way to handle young kids doing things than suspension".  Just trying to put this in perspective.  You and I have butted heads many times in other threads about really weighty issues.  This isn't one of them.  In my opinion.

[SKL]

OK, it might not be the weightiest issue out there, but I do think it affects how young people are learning to treat others.  And also their acceptance of extreme authority measures that don't make logical sense.  I don't think it bodes well for the future, but maybe I am hysterical.

[shawthorne44]

He was 14.

 

His parents hired a lawyer and appealed it and got it reduced to some weeks.

 

The whole story (summarized of course) is that a bully purposely busted up his science fair project, and he pushed back physically.  (Again, this was his first offense of getting physical ever.)  He had a small piece of rubber (thin wire insulation) in his hand because he had just cut it off a wire as part of making his science fair project.  Because he had the rubber in his hand when he pushed back, it was a "weapon" and zero tolerance kicked in.  The other boy (who blackened my nephew's eye) (and who was a repeat violent offender) got only a 3-day suspension, because he didn't have anything in his hands at the time.

 

My nephew's parents agreed that he had done wrong and deserved punishment.  But they argued that there was no "weapon."

 

If the 6-month suspension had stuck, he would been kicked out of the IB program he was to begin the following fall.  A very big consequence for an intellectually gifted kid in a failing school district.

 

I don't even believe he deserved punishment.  What was he supposed to do?

[foxbridgeacademy]

So many reasons to homeschool.

[SKL]

I don't even believe he deserved punishment.  What was he supposed to do?

 

Well, you know nobody is allowed to get physical at school for any reason whatsoever.  In some schools, everyone involved in fisticuffs gets suspended, even if they didn't throw a punch themselves.

 

What he did was react like many frustrated 14yo boys would, and many others would not.  Theoretically he should have counted to 10 or something and come up with a response that wouldn't get him in trouble.  His dad felt there was no point arguing that pushing was justified.

 

Nephew also has a speech issue where it takes him a very long time to articulate his thoughts.  Like I asked him last week, "what is your favorite class," and it took him the better part of a minute to get the first word out.  So this is not a kid who can "use his words" to deal effectively with bullies.

[MercyA]

Interesting.  I wonder why?

 

ETA: We've also talked about how power can corrupt. Honestly, that is my biggest concern for a child going into police work. But, you could say that about a lot of fields of work. Doctors, dentists, etc. I read some sad stuff about people abusing their position in other people's lives.

 

I have many reasons for not wanting my child to go into the military, some practical and some religious. I don't want to get into it all here. Short answer: we believe killing innocent people is always morally wrong, and members of the military are sometimes asked to kill innocent people.

 

As far as police work goes, I am disturbed by what seems to be the culture in some police departments. Obviously this is not the case everywhere. I agree that power can corrupt, and often does. I know there are some very good police officers, and I'm thankful for them.

[Tsuga]

So many reasons to homeschool.

Or support quality public education for all through better funding models! :D

[SKL]

I dunno, does anyone think these draconian anti-pretend-violence policies have had a positive effect over the years?  Is the younger generation growing up more kind and less violent?  Do kids feel safer in the halls of inner city schools?  Do teachers feel safer?  Is more learning taking place in what have historically been "tough" schools?  Have we stopped needing to station cops in the school buildings?  (That was never done when I was a kid.)

[Word Nerd]

So many reasons to homeschool.

 

Or support quality public education for all through better funding models! :D

 

Or encourage school parents to push back against unreasonable school policies and punishments.

[Ausmumof3]

I keep reading your title as "bows and arrows for a kinder(garten) society" and thinking ... Noooo sounds like a really bad idea!

[KungFuPanda]

I'm imagining all sorts of biblical stories that these kids could get suspended for acting out.

 

Little Johnny: We were playing. The other kids were the moneylenders in the temple. I was Jesus. I got suspended.

 

Zero tolerance trumps WWJD.

[Dmmetler]

What 8've noticed is that my Classics Club kids often don't act stuff out against each other. We see a lot of foam weapons and nerf projectiles in use, but often I'll have an entire army of Greeks fighting against imaginary Trojans, and when they spent quite awhile making shields and figuring out how to move as a group, the parents got enlisted to throw nerf balls at them to test the effect of their Turtle. It's violent play-but no more violent than the stories we're reading and discussing from Classicsl history and mythology.

 

My DD10's history notebook would probably get her suspended, or at least referred for a psychological evaluation, because she's illustrating British history as she works through Galore Park. It's pretty bloody....

[Word Nerd]

Well, ime yes. The boys that start by picking victims in kindy and pretend shooting them dont stop there. They escalate as the years go by...a posse is formed, the victim is attacked in lightly supervised settings such as gym, in middle school they are attacked outright in the halls. The knives come out in high school, or the 'go kill yourself' comments. Positive behavior intervention can derail the train, especially with convincing a posse to not follow a sociopath. Our high school is a much nicer place now that violent children receive counseling and are required to cease and desist on school property. Some of them have chosen homebound and alternative school, but the learning gains by those who were held hostage previously, and the reduced litigation costs more than pay for the security staff.

What about all the kids who are just playing? We used to play Star Wars at recess and used pretend light sabers against each other. No one was bullying anyone.

[Tsuga]

Or encourage school parents to push back against unreasonable school policies and punishments.

 

Well that too, but it's easier when you have choices as well as funding that keeps enough people in the classroom.

[MBM]

Most schools take little interest in learning about new theories in child development. They hang on tightly to tired, old beliefs that ultimately don't change the child's behavior or leaves the child quietly seething underneath or depressed. One definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Schools are no exception to this; I would say it's the norm at most of them.

 

Schools' responses/punishments don't work because they don't understand what's driving a child's behavior. Instead, many school personnel behave like overlords who are unwilling to attune to the students and unable to inspire and motivate. IOW, they don't know how to get the kids to do what they want. I saw this numerous times at my three kids' former elementary and middle schools. The school district we live in now is fabulous at taking the time to learn how to work with the students -- and it shows. Our schools are large and open and students are given a lot of freedom provided they demonstrate they can handle it. Punishments are appropriate and given out in kind ways designed to change the student's behavior. Administration, teachers, parents and students get along. More schools should be taking the time to question what they are doing, asking if it's helping, and seeking to learn more. Too much effort, I guess.

 

Also, if we don't want children to pretend to play violently, maybe we should work to change what our children are exposed to daily: TV violence, the news, exchanges between adults. Those would be good places to start.

[El...]

Coincidentally, Dd got a huge rubber band in a box from Rainbow Resource yesterday.  She immediately made it into a bow, using a stick as the bow and some pieces of a pool noodle as arrows.  The urge to innovate and arm up is pretty intrinsic, I guess!

[JumpyTheFrog]

What I wonder is if there is any overlap between these "no pretend violence" schools and the ones that let violent special needs students regularly terrorize the classroom. I believe Heigh Ho is the member here that frequently reports about her local schools continuing to allow mainstreamed students to throw chairs across the room, leaving all the classmates to be fearful in school and jumpy out of school.

[JumpyTheFrog]

How much of these crazy policies is a result of most teachers being new and most likely not parents yet themselves? Nationally something like half of all new teachers quit the career within four years. This means that the percent of teachers with many years, or decades, of experience has probably gone way down in the last twenty years. It's a good bet that a much higher percent of teachers haven't had kids yet themselves and therefore don't realize how many little boys play. I have two rough and tumble boys and they'd be toast in any situation where playing good guys vs. bad guys would lead to a suspension.

[Word Nerd]

Playing is playing. Everyone is happy. The trouble comes when someone decides to encourage the group to pile on one student, or they use the cover of the group to attack one student. The answer there, at school, is counseling and redirecting..there are other ways to get ones anger out, or lead a team, than picking and attacking victims. The school atmosphere needs to be one where no one has to watch their back, and no one is shunned.

 

What does this have to do with the story we're discussing?

[Lizzie in Ma]

That's crap.  Archery is an Olympic sport for Pete's sake!

[Bluegoat]

I dunno, does anyone think these draconian anti-pretend-violence policies have had a positive effect over the years?  Is the younger generation growing up more kind and less violent?  Do kids feel safer in the halls of inner city schools?  Do teachers feel safer?  Is more learning taking place in what have historically been "tough" schools?  Have we stopped needing to station cops in the school buildings?  (That was never done when I was a kid.)

 

No, I don't think they have made a difference. 

 

The thing is, pretending to do something really isn't the same as doing it. 

 

Kids pretend all kinds of things that would be totally inappropriate if they were really doing them, or if adults did them, but are ok for kids playing.  They generally speaking serve a developmental purpose. 

 

I think this kind of thing distracts from more substantial issues including real violence, it makes it less clear what is really harmful and what isn't, And I think play that includes conflict is actually importabnt to kids, just like it is to other social animals, and that includes physical conflict.

[Tsuga]

What I wonder is if there is any overlap between these "no pretend violence" schools and the ones that let violent special needs students regularly terrorize the classroom. I believe Heigh Ho is the member here that frequently reports about her local schools continuing to allow mainstreamed students to throw chairs across the room, leaving all the classmates to be fearful in school and jumpy out of school.

Yeah, but her whole neighborhood has all kinds of whacko things going on. Miami? Compton? Some ghetto in boarded up Detroit? Her neighbors are also insane. I keep trying to figure out where this hellhole is to permanently mark it off my list of places to ever go but no hints, just a litany of the worst possible living and educational circumstances one can imagine in the so-called first world.

 

I live in a gorgeous suburb in which social ties, norms, and behavior are still intact. Life is far from perfect and we pay a lot to be here but good neighbors and good schools are priceless. People are mostly KIND. Forgiving. Helpful. They say "hello" when walking their dogs and random old people remind children to look both ways and high school boys will still return your cart if your hands are full. I love it. My sister's town is also like that.

 

I cannot imagine how isolating it must be to live in a place where children are regularly screamed at at school, throw chairs, adults sue over everything and so on. I would survive but how utterly unhappy. I believe we can create better societies but it's hard work. It takes a ton of participation, trust, and mercy.

 

I do have one crazy neighbor. But his son is nice. So we have his son over for dinner, lol!

[poppy]

So many posters here have talked about their schools tolerating / understanding 'violent' play.

 

My knee jerk guess is that the bow and arrow kid was targeting someone inappropriately, so they played the zero tolerance card. It's a tool schools have the discretion to use if they feel it is called for. 

 

 

[Dmmetler]

I wonder if it would help if schools included archery and similar sports in the PE curriculum? I know the homeschool archery class here has grown dramatically with all the fans of the Hunger Games and Brave around. Every summer camp I attended had archery as an activity, and I think we had it in PE as well. I know we had a unit on fencing in either middle or high school, too.

[Bluegoat]

I am wondering though - help what?

 

Do we need to help kids who are playing about being Robin Hood or whatever?

 

I played D&D from grade six through to high school - a significant component of that was battle related things and violence, we were all really interested in armour and weapons and such.  That group of kids today are a SAHM (me,) an actor, a university prof of economics, and a bass player.  Not what you would call a violence obsessed group of people.

 

I have never been able to dig up any evidence based studies to indicate that these approaches actually accomplish what the schools seem to hope they will..

[Word Nerd]

I dunno, does anyone think these draconian anti-pretend-violence policies have had a positive effect over the years?  

 

No—and studies suggest there is little evidence that they are effective.

 

From the ABA: "There is no evidence, for instance, that zero tolerance policies—which mandate automatic punishment, such as suspension or expulsion, for infractions of a stated rule—have done anything to decrease school violence. Evidence is mounting, however, that extreme disciplinary reactions are resulting in higher rates of repeat offenses and dropout rates."

[poppy]

I am wondering though - help what?

 

Do we need to help kids who are playing about being Robin Hood or whatever?

 

I played D&D from grade six through to high school - a significant component of that was battle related things and violence, we were all really interested in armour and weapons and such.  That group of kids today are a SAHM (me,) an actor, a university prof of economics, and a bass player.  Not what you would call a violence obsessed group of people.

 

I have never been able to dig up any evidence based studies to indicate that these approaches actually accomplish what the schools seem to hope they will..

 

Did you LARP?  I was into D&D but it was all brain-based.  Or maybe lead figures.  Never 'acted out'. 

 

The kids who pretended to shoot each other were not the D&D kids, in my school.

 

 

ETA I guess I dated myself :) I am Gary Gygax era not Magic: The Gathering era.

[Dmmetler]

My thought is that pme of the best things I've seen for kids who tend to kick and punch and fight on the playground is martial arts-they get both the outlet for that energy, but also the safety lesson. I could see the same thing happening with young Katniss or Merida--that if they get a chance to shoot arrows for real and learn the safety rules, that's a legal outlet for what is no longer allowed. Besides, it's a different sport, and a chance for kids to find something they enjoy.

[LucyStoner]

How much of these crazy policies is a result of most teachers being new and most likely not parents yet themselves? Nationally something like half of all new teachers quit the career within four years. This means that the percent of teachers with many years, or decades, of experience has probably gone way down in the last twenty years. It's a good bet that a much higher percent of teachers haven't had kids yet themselves and therefore don't realize how many little boys play. I have two rough and tumble boys and they'd be toast in any situation where playing good guys vs. bad guys would lead to a suspension.

I would assume though that the policy makers --the principals and school boards and superintendents and such-- are older and most are parents. You aren't calling the shots 1-4 years outta school.

[Bluegoat]

Did you LARP?  I was into D&D but it was all brain-based.  Or maybe lead figures.  Never 'acted out'. 

 

The kids who pretended to shoot each other were not the D&D kids, in my school.

 

 

ETA I guess I dated myself :) I am Gary Gygax era not Magic: The Gathering era.

 

No, we just played in our brains as well.

 

But I think this is one of the deficiencies in this kind of policy.  If the reasoning is that violence - even pretend violence is bad because of what it means to people psychologically - that should also apply to things like role playing games, video games, violence in movies or plays or books.  Some of those things are pretty commonly allowed or even supported in schools. 

 

If we wanted to cut out every book with fighting, people would rightly be up in arms.  Lots of really good stories involve violence. 

 

If we aren't demanding that school libraries get rid of King Arthur as psychologically damaging, why would we think it is damaging to play it, or even just something like Knights and baddies, or superheroes and baddies?

[poppy]

Kind of a straw man, though. No one is saying violence as a concept is banned. It's violence between peers, typically with an aggressor and a victim, that is being questioned. Not violence itself or weapons themselves, as used by police (for example.)

[Bluegoat]

Kind of a straw man, though. No one is saying violence as a concept is banned. It's violence between peers, typically with an aggressor and a victim, that is being questioned. Not violence itself or weapons themselves, as used by police (for example.)

 

But how is there an aggressor and a victim if the kids are playing together? Pretending is not violence.  Role playing games are pretend violence between players as much as playing Robin Hood is.

 

Even pretending where the other child child doesn't want to play isn't violence, it's not different than any other game where one doesn't want to be involved.  Mostly kids can work out those issues themselves, and if they can't, then adults can help.  But pretending to shoot someone isn't violence.  It's pretend.

 

The way zero tolerance policies think about violence and play is kind of bizarre, IMO. 

[SKL]

Why do we assume that there is "an aggressor and a victim" in pretend play?  When I was a kid, everyone played these games frequently.  Cops and robbers, cowboys and Indians, Batman and Robin, whatever, it was kids all consenting to engage in active pretend play.  Nobody was (or felt like) a "victim" unless they were actually hit (without consent) or bullied, as occasionally happened with brothers who got too excited.  If someone came up with an imaginary gun pointed at my chest and said "bang bang" 300 times, that still would not make me a "victim."  It would be an opportunity to either come up with an imaginary shield or defense weapon or perform a dramatic imaginary death scene.

 

I really think adults ought to stay out of kids' play unless someone is actually getting hurt.  Putting adult meaning on what 6yo kids do is not healthy.

[poppy]

But how is there an aggressor and a victim if the kids are playing together? Pretending is not violence.  Role playing games are pretend violence between players as much as playing Robin Hood is.

 

Even pretending where the other child child doesn't want to play isn't violence, it's not different than any other game where one doesn't want to be involved.  Mostly kids can work out those issues themselves, and if they can't, then adults can help.  But pretending to shoot someone isn't violence.  It's pretend.

 

The way zero tolerance policies think about violence and play is kind of bizarre, IMO. 

 

Pretending when playing together is not violence. I am suggesting the school may be using its anti-violence policy as a tool for kids where goes to far / is inappropriate.

 

My daughter flips OUT if someone pretends to shoot her.  It's not the same as any game where one kid doesn't want to be involved, because (to her) that is someone saying she wants her to be dead.

 

I saw it at the playground last year.  The kids were all playing zoo, then one girl decided to be a poacher and shot my daughter (who was a lion).  My daughter curled in a ball and wept inconsolably.  I told  the shooter --- who was shocked ---- that she didn't do anything wrong.  My daughter's reaction wasn't her intention at all.  I bet she's played that with her brothers before, no big deal.   I do *not* think the "shooter" there was using violence inappropriately.  My daughter & I had a talk about it.

 

Now, if that same girl pretended to shoot my daughter after that, every day? Or-- if that same girl went around to every kid shooting them one by one? I'm just saying, I can imagine scenarios where the school thinks it needs to employ its anti violence policy for pretend weapons.

[SKL]

And kids will cry if they are given a *real* suspension for wielding an imaginary weapon.  Why is that OK?

 

I'm thinking it would not even cross most kids' minds that a pretend exotic weapon wielded by a superhero (or super villiain) is a no-no on the playground.  My kids are in 4th grade and they play Harry Potter and some zombie game and I'm sure they involve some pretend violence.    They would probably be shocked to hear that some schools would suspend them for this.  (Their teacher has recently been heard saying (to a parent friend of mine) that she loves the way all the 4th graders play so nicely together.)

[Bluegoat]

Pretending when playing together is not violence. I am suggesting the school may be using its anti-violence policy as a tool for kids where goes to far / is inappropriate.

 

My daughter flips OUT if someone pretends to shoot her.  It's not the same as any game where one kid doesn't want to be involved, because (to her) that is someone saying she wants her to be dead.

 

I saw it at the playground last year.  The kids were all playing zoo, then one girl decided to be a poacher and shot my daughter (who was a lion).  My daughter curled in a ball and wept inconsolably.  I told  the shooter --- who was shocked ---- that she didn't do anything wrong.  My daughter's reaction wasn't her intention at all.  I bet she's played that with her brothers before, no big deal.   I do *not* think the "shooter" there was using violence inappropriately.  My daughter & I had a talk about it.

 

Now, if that same girl pretended to shoot my daughter after that, every day? Or-- if that same girl went around to every kid shooting them one by one? I'm just saying, I can imagine scenarios where the school thinks it needs to employ its anti violence policy for pretend weapons.

 

I don't think that is what is going on with zero tolerance policies at all.  What you are describing is clearly not a zero-tolerance policy, it's a deal with it if there is a problem policy.

 

THe whole point with zero tolerance policies is that there are not meant to be any room to wiggle - any type of play weapon or play violence counts, all receive the same treatment which may well be suspension.  It's true that sometimes the people administering the policy will essentially ignore it because it is idiotic, but there are many places where they are administer as they were intended and as written. The results are typically pretty silly.

 

In this instance we don't know for sure that it is a zero tolerance policy, but that is what it sounds like based on what has been said by the principle.  That is, I think, why people don't find it difficult to believe the description of teh event - it seems to be in line with what happens when those kinds of policies are put in place.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Zero tolerance policies sound like the school version of mandatory minimum sentences in the court system.

[poppy]

Yes like I said I think there is more to the story. I do not think no child in this school has ever pretends to use a weapon before. I do not think one parent complaining means we have the whole story.