Shallow Analysis and Quick Comments

Last night, I went to the Fitness center on campus. I was planning on a quick work-out on the elliptical machines. As normal, the TV was tuned to FOX News. I will confess that I try to change channels when that happens, but there were others on the machines watching the television, so I refrained.

One of the segments involved a 5th grade girl in Florida who had been suspended -- and taken away by the police -- for using a knife to cut her lunch. It was reported that the girl made no threatening gestures with the knife. The shallow analysis and quick comments by the reporters led to much indignation on how horrible this was and what is our country becoming. A former high-powered judge was brought in to lend the proper amount of gravitas to the discussion. All those involved were in agreement. This should never have happened.

I, obviously, do not know all the details of the case. I am not even certain of the specifics of all that was said by the guests. I do have a couple of observations, though.

I have had enough experience with school rules to know that they are covered at the beginning of the school year or as soon as they become effective. Typically, both the student and parents have to sign a form indicating they have reviewed the rules and understand them. So, I wondered -- Did this happen with this student and her parents? If so, why wasn't this mentioned? Did anyone reporting the story think of this, or were they just trying to make some kind of political noise?

Then, I thought about the difficulties in enforcing any rule or law. For a rule to be effective, it must be enforceable. For a rule to be enforceable, it must be unambiguous.

At one point in my life, I taught chemistry in a high school in Tennessee. The school had a rule that there was to be no gum chewing in class. As a conscientious teacher, I tried to enforce that rule. I spent most of my time chasing after students who were chewing paper or an eraser or just chewing. Eventually, my rule became "NO CHEWING OF ANYTHING OR CHEWING MOTIONS WILL BE ALLOWED." Unambiguous. Stupid, perhaps, but enforceable.

The reason why schools have had to implement rules about knives or other potentially dangerous objects is because students have used such things on other students, on faculty, or on themselves. If the rule states that knives can be brought to school as long as no threatening gestures are made, the debate becomes then centers on when a gesture becomes threatening. How can anyone enforce this?

If someone wants to argue the inherent silliness of such rules, they have that right. It would be nice, if too idealistic, to think that a more thoughtful analysis would be employed.