February 26, 2005
Zero Tolerance = Zero Intelligence
From "The Drug War Chronicles" comes this striking and earth shaking bit of news:
"One of the noxious side-effects of prohibition is the unthinking application of its edicts. In the name of "drug-free schools," administrators, school boards, and law enforcement routinely subject students to "lock-downs" where drug-sniffing dogs roam the halls and classrooms. They increasingly resort to urine testing of students without cause. And they create policies designed to punish students who would bring banned substances to school.Even when implemented thoughtfully and flexibly, anti-drug measures that treat students as de facto "suspects" are dehumanizing, not to mention ineffective. But when implemented robotically by overzealous police and school officials entranced by the doctrine of "zero tolerance," drug prohibition's totalitarian tendencies produce results that would be laughable if they were not such a sad reflection on the society that produced them.
A case in point comes from Sikeston, MO, where 6-year-old Michaela Boyd is now enshrined in school district records -- and the mind of at least one local police officer -- as a drug offender. According to KFVS-TV "Heartland News" in the southeast Missouri town, young Boyd found an empty baggie on the ground during recess, filled it with dirt and debris, tied a ribbon around it, and gave it to a friend. But this was no harmless childish exchange in the eyes of school officials, who decided the bag of dirt looked like a bag of marijuana, and gave the child a punishment of two-days in detention for her alleged pseudo-pot peddling.Young Michaela protested her innocence. "There was nothing in the bag. I just found it on the ground," the first grader explained. So she decided to make her friend a bag of goodies. "They said what did you make this out of? I said out of dirt. And what else? I made it with rocks, clover and dirt." Sticking with her story, Michaela said she then tied the bag shut with a purple ponytail holder and gave it to her friend, saying "here's a bag of dirt."
According to the child's mother, Michele Boyd, the trouble started when the recipient of the gift bag gave it to a teacher when recess when over. The teacher consulted the principal, and mom got a call. At a meeting with the teacher and principal, Boyd said, she was told the bag of dirt "looked like a bag of weed."
"They said it was kind of a drug," Michaela said. "I don't know what those are. I only see cigarettes. That's all I say."Michele Boyd fears her daughter will be labeled a doper. "They said it would be on her school record as far as disciplinary that she made a look-alike drug, but I don't feel like that's right. Because she didn't do anything wrong."
While most people would probably roll their eyes at this ludicrous tale, Sikeston Police Sgt. Shirley Porter is not one of them. In a follow-up story on "Heartland News" a few days after the big bust, Porter said the case needs to be taken seriously. In Porter's eyes, 6-year-old Michaela Boyd was dealing fake drugs, and that's a crime. "If she would have been 14, we would have been arrested her and taken her to jail," Porter said."
Now, I'll admit that possession with intent to distribute is a crime, I'll even go so far as to agree that de-criminalization of small amounts of probably 90% of the illegal/illicit drugs is probably a good thing. I'm even libertarian enough to agree that more time needs to be spent on education and treatment rather than interdiction and prison. And I'll admit that as a counselor, I also see how much harm can be done by drugs and alcohol. However, I also have a God given brain and God expects me to use it. So, here is the big question, the $64,000 Question (Whoops, you just dated yourself. -ed.) Why the heck didn't the folks at this school and Officer Krupke (with apologies to the cast, crew and author of West Side Story....) (Whoops, you did it again. -ed.) use THEIR brains?
HT to Discarded Lies Posted by GM Roper at February 26, 2005 03:38 PM | TrackBack
It truly is a perplexing problem. There is no doubt, built on years of evidence, that drug and alcohol abuse can be very harmful physically and psychically. There is also little doubt that drugs and alcohol can be taken in a non-abusive manner - not without risk, just in a non-abusive way.
The public high school that my children attended had a zero tolerance policy on drugs and alcohol. This policy extended not only to those found in possession and under the influence, but also those in their presence. Thus, a student visited by a drunk or stoned friend could be found in violation and subject to the same penalty as their inebriated friend.
There were several absurd cases where a sober student, acting as a designated driver for a drunk friend or two was punished with suspension from social and athletic activities, suspension from school, and required to attend first step counseling.
My wife and I are of an age that means we grew up (high school and college) through the early to late 70's. We drank alcohol as underage high schoolers and as legal college-aged kids. We smoked marijuanna. I "experimented" with other drugs as well. And, yet, we have been successful, self-supporting adults who, I think, most people would describe as responsible members of society. Btw, we gave up the drug and alcohol stuff around the time we got married (1980) and got REAL jobs.
We agonized over what to tell our children when they asked the inevitable questions. We have many friends who argued, vehemently, that we should do as they intended and lie and tell our kids that we have always been clean. But we couldn't do that so we told them the truth - absent many/most of the details.
We also told them of high school friends who never made it out of high school because they died in drunk driving accidents (as did my youngest brother). We told them about friends whose lives were ruined and/or seriously set back by abuse of alcohol and drugs - those that flunked out of school, were unable to hold down jobs, and even a couple that spent some time in jail.
So far (knock wood) our honesty has paid off. They drink occasionally (few college students don't). They have smoked pot. And they appear to be healthy, happy, and largely responsible young people. For our part we are vigilant and have strict rules about drinking and driving and such. They appear to respect our rules; we continue to look for signs that they don't.
The ironic thing about zero tolerance polices is that they drive all this behavior underground - they don't eliminate it. I don't know if you saw the story about the young girl at a college in the midwest who died recently. She had been engaged in some very heavy drinking with friends and when she became incoherent and passed out they simply put her in a dorm room to "sleep in off". Well, she never woke up. Apparently they didn't want to tell anyone in authority at the school for fear that they would get in trouble.
I don't advocate, like some, that we should dramatically alter our laws about the legal drinking age and drug use. But instead of these foolish zero-tolerance regulations we should explain to kids why these substances are dangerous (in an honest, non-hyperbolic way), why they should only be consumed by responsible people who understand the risks and know how they may be used safely, and to be observant about where our kids are going, who they are with, and what they are up to.
Maybe then there will be fewer suffering from drug and alcohol induced mental illness, anguish, and death. And fewer 6 year olds with criminal records.
Posted by too many steves at February 26, 2005 05:07 PM
So the moral of this story is lock up the dirt bags and not the people who tie them up?
LOL at the whole absurd mentality but also wondering how far we are from a police state and loss of freedom if the PC police are ever put in charge. Sobering for those drunk on humor.
Posted by Alnot at March 1, 2005 08:48 AM
