ZERO Tolerance Policy
"Zero Tolerance Policy"....sounds harsh doesn't it! Think about it, do we really want a system of justice that ISN'T applied with a zero tolerance policy? Without a zero tolerance policy some people commit crimes and aren't charged while others commit the same crime and are charged. Probably would feel like a better system if you are on the side that doesn't get charged.
Who would decide which illegal actions are charged and which are not? Maybe the arresting officer should decide or pass it up stairs to the person in charge of the shift or higher. How the decision is made is also brought into question. The arresting officer may decide not to charge someone because they are a member of his family or even a friend of a friend. We would end up with a society that some people have to obey the law and some don't.
In our system of government the constitution lays out three branches. Article 1 of the Constitution lays out the powers of Congress to create laws. Article 3 provides the judicial branch with the power to interpret the law. Article 2 Section 1 of the Constitution assigns the "executive power" to the president.
The term "executive power" is defined by BusinessDictionary.com to mean
Authority to enforce orders and to ensure they are carried out as intended.
To reinforce this responsibility Article 2 Section 3 of the Constitution says of the president "he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed". When congress creates a law there is never a section in the law providing the person enforcing the law with the discretion of whether or not to pursue actions making sure the law is complied with as intended. Laws written by congress include descriptions of what is illegal and what the punishments are for not complying with the laws.
In general zero tolerance shouldn't be a policy that we object to because we don't like subsequent actions that are required by enforcing laws. Zero tolerance should be an expectation we have of those enforcing laws, from the President down to the local cop in your hometown. Currently, however, President Trump and Attorney General Sessions are being criticized for simply doing their job. But let's face it, in the current environment President Trump's administration will be criticized for whatever action they take or don't take. Remember the saying "damned if you do, damned if you don't", that's the situation this administration has been placed in.
Exactly.
And the residule consequences of enforcing the law are just that. You break the law you and others in your family will face consequences. Living legally or illegally in the U.S., well, for the most part. The 80/20 rule really doesn't apply.
If the police raid the home of a meth dealer, legal citizen, arrest parents, do they not place the children in some type of child protective custody or with known, reliable family? Do these parents get 20 days with their kids while things are 'sorted out'? If they can't post bail are they allowed to stay at home with the kids? No, no, no and no.
So zero tolerance is simply the law.
And this being debated why?
You extremist right wing conservative....welcome to the club!
Hell yeah.
And such a compliment, thank you!
Zero tolerance is a terrible policy. Alot of kids have suffered from this in school.
School is different from our legal system, comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges. Still, in schools children should be taught to follow rules. Are you suggesting that some kids should be allowed to break the rules while others are not? How have they suffered, can you be more specific?
No. Certain things are viewed as threats in school that are simply misunderstandings. A zero tolerance policy handles all threats the same and so kids who are acting out without maturity get caught up in the system.
I agree with you that there are times when those in charge of schools overreact to the actions of some kids. I would deem these to be a "one punishment fits all" policy rather than a zero tolerance.
If a kid does something that is considered "threatening" there should be some response (zero tolerance) but how the issue is addressed should be appropriate for the situation. Even in our legal system a first offense isn't punished like a habitual offender would be, but we place rules like that in our schools. It makes no sense.
I really don't think our views are as far apart as we both may have originally thought.
True! Good talking.