Sigh. I’m pondering big stuff tonight.
I’ve been thinking about the total joke that is our legal system and the sheer disappointment I have in the systems that control so much of our lives. Day to day I am quite happy—I work hard to live in a way I find fulfilling and good for more than myself. I have a good community. I’m surrounded by people who challenge and support me. But all compassion, humanity and common sense reasoning evaporates as soon as we enter the world/business/bureaucracy of our official systems. And before I get lost in lofty and non-specific jabbering, I’ll toss out one small story to give some ground to what I’m saying. You may have already heard it.
This past week a six-year-old boy was sentenced to 45-days at reform school for bringing a spoon/fork/knife combo to school. He had just joined the cub scouts and was so excited that he wanted to use his camping utensil at lunch. This, however, violated the school’s zero-tolerance policy toward weapons in the school environment. This means a teacher or several teachers, a principal and a superintendent had to agree that this boy’s violation was worthy of such punishment.
We assign a black and white framework to a colorful world and rules/laws that are intended to protect people end up doing harm. What are we teaching that six year old boy about the world? Basically, that it makes no sense.
Zero tolerance—to anything—is a lazy and ineffective (non)solution to complex problems. Even a magnificent organization I spent years working for has a zero tolerance policy on drugs. “Great” most people say. But when it comes to enforcing these policies any real chance at helping people is tossed out the window. It might be harder to orchestrate, but if we approached any given situation from a human—rather than system—viewpoint, I guarantee we would have more effective outcomes.
I’m intentionally avoiding other specific—personal—stories that could further demonstrate the broke joke of jail and “the law,” but I’m content to wander the rooms of my mind for a salve to dissatisfaction. I really don’t care if I’m not saying anything new here. Just so long as I’m not adding to the wide-spread practice of indifference.
p.s. — maybe I’m quashing any substance this rant might have had by refusing to get personal, but that’s not really an option right now. So, I guess oh well is the best I can offer.
The case of the six year old boy is unfortunate. What will he think of law as he ages? What will he think of camping? Of school?
I understand the rule against no weapons in school, but whomever interpreted this to mean a camping utensil is the one in the wrong. One has to consider intent in this kids actions (tell his friends about his amazing outdoor experiences). And event if one does that, he’s six.
I’m just glad it wasn’t the civil war he was into. Imagine what punishment he would have received for the replica civil war rifle he could have brought in for show and tell.
Next, lets just hope he doesn’t take up knitting. I hear those knitting needles are dangerous!
Until then, I think I will be packing my camping utensil in my lunch sack today. All the other kids at the lunch table will love it.
I agree that some decisions made go too far. I also think that it is unfair to clump together world/business/bureaurcracy systems. The problem lies as much in the media and how they dramaticize these stories. It would be ideal if people could self police themselves, but what do we do when they do not?
Judgment is needed. Judgment is where administrators and judges interpret rules for the greater good(in theory). Policies and rules are created so that people have a common language in which to live. Some need to be black and white, while most are left up to judgment calls.
What would be your suggestion for a better system?
Jay (and Brandt), Thanks for the thoughtful responses on a surely over-simplified rant. It is too easy to complain without offering suggestions for a better system.
Here’s another simplified answer to a complex question: I think the key is compassion. Judgement may be necessary, but any rule that removes the capacity for thoughtful discourse seems ultimately ineffective. I don’t mean to say that justice isn’t out there, but it does seem absent in zero-tolerance policies, regardless that the reason for such policies is to protect people. Policies like “three strikes and you’re out” don’t help people, they put people away for petty crimes.
My suggestion for a better system would involve a less business-minded approach (like the one I saw in a courtroom recently) and more conversation. It would involve actual rehabilitation in all forms that word can take: teaching people how to act appropriately in a classroom, an organization or a larger community. It would require a greater investment from all sides.
If I’m being unrealistic, I’m happy to be a dreamer. But I’m not happy if I’m alienating people by unfairly clumping complex aspects of life together. Thanks for pushing me to be honest with myself, and you.
p.s. I don’t think what I’m saying has anything to do with media representation. If anything, I think the media helps more people to buy into systems that don’t really work all that well.