Page 1 of 1
'Knife At Lunch Gets 10-Year-Old Girl Arrested At School'
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:18 pm
by Brk
http://www.wftv.com/news/14858405/detail.html
OCALA, Fla. -- A 10-year old Ocala girl brought her lunch to school and a small kitchen knife to cut it. She now faces a felony charge after being arrested. The school and the sheriff's office disagree on the reason for the arrest.
School officials say the 5th grader was brown-bagging it. She brought a piece of steak for her lunch, but she also brought a steak knife. That's when deputies were called.
It happened in the cafeteria at Sunrise Elementary School. The 10-year-old used the knife to cut the meat.
"She did not use it inappropriately. She did not threaten anyone with it. She didn't pull it out and brandish it. Nothing of that nature," explained Marion County School Spokesman Kevin Christian.
But a couple of teachers took the utensil and called the sheriff. When deputies arrived, they were unable to get the child's parents on the phone, so they arrested her and took her to the county's juvenile assessment center.
"And we didn't handcuff her or treat her like a criminal. But, we took her to the assessment center to be assessed," said Capt. James Pogue, Marion County Sheriff's Office.
School officials said it doesn't matter what the knife was being used for. They said they had no choice.
"Anytime there's a weapon on campus, yes, we have to report it and we aggressively report it because we don't want to take any chances, regardless," Christian said.
But the sheriff's office said the extreme measures in what some may say was a harmless incident had to do with school policy, not theirs.
"But once we're notified, we have to take some type of action," Pogue explained.
The student now faces a felony charge for the possession of a weapon on school property and the principal suspended her for ten days. The parents of the girl could not be reached for comment.
The sheriff's office has turned the case over to the State Attorney's Office.
We have lost all touch with reality.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:22 pm
by Sava700
I kinda agree with you Burke, however I'd like to see a picture of the knife she was using, I mean if it was a 6" dice and slice knife from a collection vs a butter knife that would have done the trick then I can see a issue but not so much as to arrest her and charge a felony.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:35 pm
by Dan
they should have tased her until she foamed at the mouth!
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:36 pm
by Dan
Sava700 wrote:I kinda agree with you Burke, however I'd like to see a picture of the knife she was using, I mean if it was a 6" dice and slice knife from a collection vs a butter knife that would have done the trick then I can see a issue but not so much as to arrest her and charge a felony.
yes,and 0 tolerance means 0 tolerance
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:52 pm
by Sava700
Dan wrote:yes,and 0 tolerance means 0 tolerance
true...
But thats alot for a 10year old to go through for something she prob didn't know any better of.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:54 pm
by Dan
Sava700 wrote:true...
But thats alot for a 10year old to go through for something she prob didn't know any better of.
yes,her parents should have known better,and not giver her that knife,they share the responsibility in this particular case.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:02 pm
by Zilog B
That's freaking retarded. We've become a nation of wusses.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:09 pm
by Brent
Sava700 wrote:I kinda agree with you Burke, however I'd like to see a picture of the knife she was using, I mean if it was a 6" dice and slice knife from a collection vs a butter knife that would have done the trick then I can see a issue but not so much as to arrest her and charge a felony.
There is a picture in the link
Seriously though, bringing a knife to school would be considered a weapon, even if it were a knife for cutting lunch food. So I can understand them defining it as a "weapon", but they took it to far.
Obviously there was no need to arrest her and sentence her, a felony charge? Come on, that's pretty stupid.
What should have happened IMO is that the teacher or whatever should have just gone up to the kid and explained about the rules and tell her not to bring it again, that would have been the end of it. At the very most, just take the knife away from her.
I think the Earth is currently passing through a spatial anomaly that makes everyone retarded.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:20 pm
by downhill
Yep...but the teacher should have cut her steak up first and sent a note home with her to have the parents cut up the meat before they pack it in a brown bag.
Second question........a brown bag and a chunk of steak? The parents are also to blame in this situation. In my day, there was no place to put your luch to keep it cold. Has this situation changed?
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:22 pm
by Brent
downhill wrote:Yep...but the teacher should have cut her steak up first and sent a note home with her to have the parents cut up the meat before they pack it in a brown bag.
That would actually have been the best solution, the teacher would then be "teaching", imagine that.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm
by Randy
Zilog B wrote:That's freaking retarded. We've become a nation of wusses.
welcome to southern Canada
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:13 pm
by Randy
a steak knife in some rare circumstances could be used for actually cutting steak * slaps maddocs desk* pay attention!
now a pencil on the other hand could be used as a weapon to blind you teacher or possibly cause Brain damage. Furthermore Bunsen burners, skipping rope etc......
What America need to do is create an educational environment that is safe for children and that is why Americans should teach class in a padded room with crayons for 12 years
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:17 pm
by TonyT
Todays teachers are NOT trained to use judgement. Blanket across-the-boards policies like that one re knives is indicitave of the psycho-socialist world we live in now. This type of policy does not work and only serves to create a society that cannot confront (face things), cannot communicate and cannot expand. The goal is more restriction and cowed citizens. Those teachers are wussies.
Think about how the chain of events may have taken place:
1. kid pulls out knife and proceeds to cut steak.
2. teacher observes student cutting steak.
3. teacher equates kid using knife as a threat and a violatition of school policy.
4. teacher does not attempt to communicate w/ kid because teacher cannot confront knives and shrugs responsibility.
5. teacher tries to compute a solution to the situation.
6. teacher takes the absolute minimum amount of responsibility for his/her environment and calls sherrif.
7. teacher is afraid to "rock the boat" and "buck the system".
8. teacher continues to be a babysitter and not an educator.
9. teachers gather in employee lounge later on and natter to one another, reinforcing the group agreement that "there's nothing we can do about it".
10. sherrif commeds teacher...
11. society inches forward toward a more extreme police state.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:18 pm
by JC
downhill wrote:Yep...but the teacher should have cut her steak up first and sent a note home with her to have the parents cut up the meat before they pack it in a brown bag.
Second question........a brown bag and a chunk of steak? The parents are also to blame in this situation. In my day, there was no place to put your luch to keep it cold. Has this situation changed?
Don't know. At my kids school they have a walk in cooler to put your lunch in if you bring your own.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:18 pm
by Brent
Of course, the parent should have also known not to send their kid to school with a knife. The steak should have been pre-cut at home. Honestly, both sides acted stupid here.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:20 pm
by JC
What do you expect from a government school?
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:20 pm
by TonyT
knives don't kill.
guns don't kill.
kids that take psychotropic drugs kill.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:24 pm
by Randy
TonyT wrote:Todays teachers are NOT trained to use judgement.
They weren't back in my day either
EX: Teacher "Sams high on acid again for the 5th and we will just ignore that and continue class as normal as we can."
Teacher " Randy stop trying to tweak sams trip by teasing him".
Sams mother was never notified of his lsd sessions. He and others were just ignored and class would continue as normal
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:26 pm
by Humboldt
I can't blame them for covering their butts given this sue-happy society, but that does seem to have been blown way out of proportion.
Must've scared the hell out of that little girl.
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:32 pm
by Randy
If you see a kid 5 yrs - 18 yrs old using a steak knife weather it be at school a restaurant or @ your house for dinner DO NOT approach the child simply slip away to another room and call police.
Land of the Free my ass
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:58 pm
by panicattack
Sava700 wrote:I kinda agree with you Burke, however I'd like to see a picture of the knife she was using, I mean if it was a 6" dice and slice knife from a collection vs a butter knife that would have done the trick then I can see a issue but not so much as to arrest her and charge a felony.
When i read the title, i visualized her bring a 3 foot razor sharp machette but she only brought a "small kitchen knife" (see description).
A sharpened metal ruler, fork, or set of chop sticks would be more letha.
To be crude, those people have **** for brains. And they are responsible for educating our future generations
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:12 pm
by David
TonyT wrote:knives don't kill.
guns don't kill.
kids that take psychotropic drugs kill.
A painter without his paints is not a painter. Remove a dog's teeth and it is far less likely to wound.
Sociopaths and the bullied are your typical young murders.
Lunch monitors acted according to guidelines set by the school board (Note to the parents). In my day, metal knives were confiscated, however the authorities were not called unless there was a threat. Some "adjustments" will be made at the next meeting of the board, I should think.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:06 am
by YARDofSTUF
TonyT wrote:knives don't kill.
guns don't kill.
kids that take psychotropic drugs kill.
You need to lay off on this stuff or go make ur own thread for it like sava's gas thread.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:15 am
by Shagster
Common sense would say to take the knife away from the child and call their parents to tell them not to let it happen again.
School and the cops should feel like idiots for this.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:59 am
by Joint Chiefs of Staff
Randy wrote:
What America need to do is create an educational environment that is safe for children and that is why Americans should teach class in a padded room with crayons for 12 years
See now a crayon could be used as a lethal weapon as well....
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:01 am
by Joint Chiefs of Staff
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:25 am
by Sava700
They had it on CNN news this morning..I would imagin the majority will view this as "overkill" and sure enough they will prob feel like stupid teachers/cops for doing this.
Its not often I agree with Burke but this is a case that is just plain stupid.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:38 am
by David
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:03 am
by Dan
people complain about stories like this that it's ridiculous,but those same people snivel the loudest that not enough was done to protect the students and staff when another Columbine occurs
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:09 am
by Roody
Working at a school myself albeit a private one with faculty that uses their heads alot better I think it's safe to say this issue went overboard bigtime. As others have suggested at worst they should have stepped in, assisted the student with cutting her food, and then taken the knife away from her. Although school policies do exist to deal with weapons sometimes a person has to use their common sense to recognize the situation they are currently dealing with. It's a judgment call, and it's clear the staff in that situation overstepped their bounds.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:47 am
by downhill
JC wrote:What do you expect from a government school?
Got news for you, JC. Both the school and the law were doing what society was asking of them.
I'm willing to bet your own private school has the same no tolerance rules. If they don't then they are putting themselves at a major risk for a lawsuit of biblical proportions if by chance someone goes nuts.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:51 am
by Roody
downhill wrote:Got news for you, JC. Both the school and the law were doing what society was asking of them.
I'm willing to bet your own private school has the same no tolerance rules. If they don't then they are putting themselves at a major risk for a lawsuit of biblical proportions if by chance someone goes nuts.
Unfortunately zero tolerance rules open a school up to overreactions that can also lead to lawsuits. Naturally any school worth it's salt is going to have a no weapons policy, but there needs to be room to adjust to situations not always planned for. Of course you know that DH as well as anyone here does. It's a screwy situation no doubt.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:11 am
by Gixxer
"we took her to the assessment center to be assessed," said Capt. James Pogue, Marion County Sheriff's Office."
because we all know it is very peculiar to use a steak knife on staek
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:55 pm
by TonyT
Got news for you, JC. Both the school and the law were doing what society was asking of them.
When has society asked for such policies in schools?
At school board meetings? At the polls?
I've never been asked and I've never seen such a question at the polls.
All too often laws get made and the people get asked about them afterward. I may be a bit older than most here at SG. When I went to school there were simple policies.
1. no criminal students allowed in the school, they either changed their ways or were booted out.
2. no weapons allowed in school, but one could carry a pen knife.
3. there was no effort to retain children so as to collect more state funding like is done today. Criminal children are labeled as "xxxx-challenged" and kept in schools because the state compensates well.
People today are no more complex than the people of the past. The complexities stem from the failure of today's edu system to understand people, period. Cultures change, the environment changes, but what makes a person tick has not changed at all.
The whole concept of "zero tolerence" is illogical. Some may claim that society endorses zero tolerence. It is sold to them and they buy it. Why? Because society has gone downhill and society at large tolerates more immorality than in previous times. It's easy to prove. Ask someone what they would do if they witnessed a crime. Any crime, be it a white lie, shoplifting or murder. Most will do nothing at all. We live in a dishonest society.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:07 pm
by frostybear
downhill wrote:Got news for you, JC. Both the school and the law were doing what society was asking of them.
TonyT wrote:When has society asked for such policies in schools?
At school board meetings? At the polls?
I've never been asked and I've never seen such a question at the polls.
All too often laws get made and the people get asked about them afterward. I may be a bit older than most here at SG. When I went to school there were simple policies.
1. no criminal students allowed in the school, they either changed their ways or were booted out.
2. no weapons allowed in school, but one could carry a pen knife.
3. there was no effort to retain children so as to collect more state funding like is done today. Criminal children are labeled as "xxxx-challenged" and kept in schools because the state compensates well.
People today are no more complex than the people of the past. The complexities stem from the failure of today's edu system to understand people, period. Cultures change, the environment changes, but what makes a person tick has not changed at all.
The whole concept of "zero tolerence" is illogical. Some may claim that society endorses zero tolerence. It is sold to them and they buy it. Why? Because society has gone downhill and society at large tolerates more immorality than in previous times. It's easy to prove. Ask someone what they would do if they witnessed a crime. Any crime, be it a white lie, shoplifting or murder. Most will do nothing at all. We live in a dishonest society.
I believe he means what the
Engineered society has asked for.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:27 pm
by downhill
TonyT wrote:A.When has society asked for such policies in schools?
At school board meetings? At the polls?
I've never been asked and I've never seen such a question at the polls.
All too often laws get made and the people get asked about them afterward. I may be a bit older than most here at SG. When I went to school there were simple policies.
1. no criminal students allowed in the school, they either changed their ways or were booted out.
2. no weapons allowed in school, but one could carry a pen knife.
3. there was no effort to retain children so as to collect more state funding like is done today. Criminal children are labeled as "xxxx-challenged" and kept in schools because the state compensates well.
People today are no more complex than the people of the past. The complexities stem from the failure of today's edu system to understand people, period. Cultures change, the environment changes, but what makes a person tick has not changed at all. B.
C. The whole concept of "zero tolerance" is illogical. Some may claim that society endorses zero tolerance. It is sold to them and they buy it. Why? Because society has gone downhill and society at large tolerates more immorality than in previous times. It's easy to prove. Ask someone what they would do if they witnessed a crime. Any crime, be it a white lie, shoplifting or murder. Most will do nothing at all. We live in a dishonest society.
A.When schools started getting to dangerous for kids to attend. We've become accoustomed to giving up things when we fear...
B. Agreed, people as a single individual aren't more complex...or less complex or smarter or dumber. However times are certainly different than when you and I went to school. Big time different. I knew very few latch key kids. The times were certainly different as far as sex, drugs, violence on TV. I would also assume that the peer pressure on kids is also different. Not much on the tube about family values or shows that teach moral lessons. Even if there were, what kid over the age of 12 would watch it?
C. You just made the case of why...society accepts zero tolerance and tossed out logical thinking. Tony T...I think that society's all have their ups and downs. Give it another 50 years and you may see a more Elizabethan society or something right out of George Orwell's 1984 or even something that looks more like "Blade Runner". Who knows?
I should add that it's just simpler for a school system to adapt a zero tolerance rule other than to ask teacher to accept responsilbility for making a mistake in judgment.
I'm not supporting zero tolerance but showing why it exits.
Personally I hate it.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:51 pm
by TonyT
downhill wrote:A.When schools started getting to dangerous for kids to attend. We've become accoustomed to giving up things when we fear...
B. Agreed, people as a single individual aren't more complex...or less complex or smarter or dumber. However times are certainly different than when you and I went to school. Big time different. I knew very few latch key kids. The times were certainly different as far as sex, drugs, violence on TV. I would also assume that the peer pressure on kids is also different. Not much on the tube about family values or shows that teach moral lessons. Even if there were, what kid over the age of 12 would watch it?
C. You just made the case of why...society accepts zero tolerance and tossed out logical thinking. Tony T...I think that society's all have their ups and downs. Give it another 50 years and you may see a more Elizabethan society or something right out of George Orwell's 1984 or even something that looks more like "Blade Runner". Who knows?
I should add that it's just simpler for a school system to adapt a zero tolerance rule other than to ask teacher to accept responsilbility for making a mistake in judgment.
I'm not supporting zero tolerance but showing why it exits.
Personally I hate it.
I agree w/ all of what you said, except I believe that on its own, society won't become better or more honest/ethical/moral. History has shown us that civilizations deteriorate and our present society is well past the point where previous societies collapsed. This society struggles because there are a few who work hard to improve it while there are few who work hard to destroy it and while the many do nothing at all about it foolishly believing that "things fix themselves". Those who do nothing and ignore society's problems don't realize that by not doing anything about it they are passively condoning the few who seek to destroy it.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:31 pm
by frostybear
TonyT wrote: This society struggles because there are a few who work hard to improve it while there are few who work hard to destroy it and while the many do nothing at all about it foolishly believing that "things fix themselves". Those who do nothing and ignore society's problems don't realize that by not doing anything about it they are passively condoning the few who seek to destroy it.
+1
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:00 pm
by David
TonyT wrote:I agree w/ all of what you said, except I believe that on its own, society won't become better or more honest/ethical/moral. History has shown us that civilizations deteriorate and our present society is well past the point where previous societies collapsed. This society struggles because there are a few who work hard to improve it while there are few who work hard to destroy it and while the many do nothing at all about it foolishly believing that "things fix themselves". Those who do nothing and ignore society's problems don't realize that by not doing anything about it they are passively condoning the few who seek to destroy it.
Societies (citizenry), would never have the aforementioned attributes without the fear of consequence. It is the most visible overlap of secular law and religious prescript. It is human nature to prey on the vulnerable. No doubt, those Will to Power individuals desire the spoils of their enterprises, regardless of who is to suffer. Depending on the millieu, this behavior is staunched or promoted.
I do not believe the US is prepared for collapse, but for a transformation. We have returned to the syndicratic oligarchy of the late 19th century. It is only a matter of time before the Pinkertons or the National Guard return to bust heads of the restive masses (<whistles>). No Theodore Roosevelt this time.... more like a Hu or a Putin. Gosh, I hope I am wrong.
