[Prudence]

I have some sympathy for the school. They're in a tough position. As more and more parents take a hands-off approach to raising their own kids, a bigger and bigger burden gets piled on schools. They don't just teach anymore - now they have to teach to the standardized exam, try to teach self-control without infringing on wittle pwecious's right to free expression, walk the line between exposing kids to a variety of ideas and fending off parents who want Stepford children. Sometimes "zero tolerance" policies seem like the only realistic solution; there just aren't the resources to evaluate individual circumstances.

That doesn't mean zero tolerance policies are appropriate. As others have said, we don't know the surrounding circumstances. I know I'm suspicious after past zero tolerance sweeps rounding up kids as drug peddlers for passing out an aspirin or Midol.

I'm also concerned because if it *was* nothing, this is the kind of thing that "turns a good kid bad." Granted, I have a unique perspective from spending my grade school years in surrounded by neurotic high achievers, but if you had suspended one of us for something we felt was unjust - that was it. The record was blemished. All hope of getting into the Ivys would be dashed and one might as well head out back to smoke.

I guess my thinking is, if it was part of some larger pattern of intimidation or insubordination, then THAT was the offense: intimidation or insubordination or whatever. And I think school's are within their rights to punish those sorts of behaviors. And maybe that's what it was - goodness knows the media wouldn't report "student suspended for disobeying teacher" when they could go with "student suspended for drawing a gun."