Originally Posted By: Compugeek
So where do you draw the line? 3"? If 3" is long enough to be dangerous, what about 2-7/8"? Or 2-31/32"?

And how long does a blade have to be to be "dangerous"? How long a blade do you need to reach the jugular? To puncture an eyeball? To cut a finger?


You're asking these questions too late Compugeek - the time to ask them is before a zero tolerance policy is adopted by a school board. You cannot argue or contest based on lethality or severity or any other factor, the policy is already made. Why demonize local administrators - at this point they are following a developed policy without any leeway for interpretation or compromise, and in fact the school district incurs significant liability if anyone exercises judgment in the face of such a policy. Who will defend the administrator who let Eagle Scout #4 keep his 1 1/2 inch pocket knife, which was found stuck in the eye of Dangerous Stoner #7 after a football game? Or switch the roles, doesn't matter - the administrator is hosed either way.

The folks who want a zero tolerance policy on weapons are getting exactly what they lobbied for. You probably have pretty much an identical policy in your school district. Go to your school board meeting, read your opinions on zero tolerance weapons policies during the public portion of the meeting, see if it does you any good. It takes alot of brain power to overturn or amend a zero tolerance policy once enacted.