Higgy finally i think you've said something here i can pretty much agree with.

But rational people using a reasonable thought process should be able to differentiate between a knife in school and a p-car in the garage.

My wife bought our six year old son a leatherman type tool a couple months ago. The first thing I told my son when I saw it was " don't bring that to school unless you want to get into big trouble with the principle". I brought this story to his attention yesterday. It's common knowledge that you can't bring any kind of knife or even toy gun to school. My daughter got some flack for wearing a necklace with a revolver pendant to school several years ago.

We don't live like Huckleberry Finn, times have changed. This whole incident is the parent's fault IMO. I'm glad they're not going to send the kid to reform school, but it's common sense not to allow your kids to take any kind of knife to school.

Here's one for ya Higgins... Say the school had let me carry my leatherman and my guard buddy carry his knife. We mean no harm... But the kid that came in and out instituitions... He cam carry too right? I mean you can't be selective... I'm totally fine with no knives... Don't have any use for it in school.

Where do we draw the line at "rational"? With that, where do we draw the line at "need"? We both know there are plenty of folks out there that consider themselves entirely "rational" that will vehemently disagree with our "need" for our Porsches. Or our guns. I consider myself to be, for the most part anyway, pretty rational. I likewise consider you to be, for the most part, pretty rational. Yet we strongly disagree over pocket knives in school. Who is "right"? We can both make rational arguments for our positions, at least in our own estimations. You, however, consider my arguments pretty irrational, as I do yours. So, again, who is "right"?

There is really no "right" or "wrong", and we could go on all day and never get anywhere. The only solution, the only reasonable compromise, is that you are allowed to make your own decisions and I'm allowed to make mine. At least until our choices begin to affect each other - then we need to talk, to reach agreement. Like Abe Lincoln said, "this is a big country, and I reserve the right to swing my arms as wide as I like. My right to do so, however, ends at the end of your nose". In other words, until my actions affect you or your actions affect me, we have nothing to say about them. Live and let live.

I think a large part of the trouble we see in society today is that we have lost sight of that most basic of principles. Too many people spend too much time worrying about what might happen, and trying to ensure that it does not. They use that as justification to control others' lives; in my opinion, to an entirely unacceptable degree. Witness Sherwood, right here on this thread - conjuring up all kinds of unlikely "what if?" scenarios in an effort to justify his position. As irrational as he appears to me, I understand he is not the worst to be found, but he does serve as a ready example of this school of thought. Just how much are we willing to give up to those worry warts, those hand-wringing ninnies, who wile away their days dreaming up all manner of catastrophy if others are allowed to do "X"? We are already far too choked with laws meant to appease this sort, to coddle them and make them feel safer. It's gone way too far. Going after boys with pocket knives, or Boy Scout utility tools in their pockets, is a symptom of that. It's completely irrational...

Why not?

Back in junior high, I witnessed one friend stabbing another in the hand with a pencil. It almost went through. Should those be banned?
Another time I saw a guy get his leg broken when slide-tackled during a soccer game. Should spiked hard shoes be banned?
Another time, I saw a guy cut through his arm with a bandsaw. The insurance liabilities are the reason why schools don't have shop classes, or auto classes. Probably why nowadays we don't have too many graduating mechanics and engineers here in the US.

Granted, weapons in general don't belong in school, but the big picture is being missed. Because of this hype, the "message" being taught to children is as long as they are weaponless and drug free and just show up, they are fuffilling their requirements to society.
No! Their requirments are to experience a range of experiences for the purpose of thinking and learning and applying those productively later on in life.
Cattle belong on the farm.
Accentuate the positive and make school fun. Some learning experiences have risk involved.


Both of these situations are crap. The the vehicle in which Eagle Scout's knife was found is a much more dangerous weapon, as was his military training. The six year old was a freakin' six year old for gods sake!
What happened to a simple conversation/warning?

Because who does the selecting? Everybody would have a different standard...

You know at first, my response to this article was like many here:

"That's absolute BS, I carried a pocketknife with me everywhere when I was a kid. It was an 'old-grandad' folding knife."


...but then I read someone saying "no one ever got stabbed with one while I was in school, and we all had them"

...and THEN it occured to me. Yes that's true, and the same goes for me. Everyone had guns in the house too and no one got shot. (and I still do). But here's the rub. Kids get shot and stabbed in school all the time now. I'm sure we could write a novel speculating as to why, but it DOES happen now. WAY to much. So I can understand the new policies of "no weapons at school". Times are different boys.

What we really need to focus on here is not the rule, but the blatant refusal of the schools administrators to look at the individual situation rationally rather than applying the blanket generalization on all situations. Yes this doesn't remove thm of all liability, tough ***** for them. They chose to be school administrator and disciplinarians. Part of the job. Clearly this kid was innocent, he wasn;tcarrying a bowie knife and threatening other kids...

We seemed to do just fine when the teachers and administrators were allowed to exercise their judgement in a case-by-case basis.

Treating everyone the same never means lifting the worst of the lot up to be equal with the best; it means holding back the best to be equal to the worst. We can do better than that.

What do you mean you can't be selective?

I had uses for knives in school. And everywhere else too.

Are you actually being serious?

The problem at least in the case of the Eagle Scout is a 2" bladed knife in his car is not a weapon, it is a tool. Yeah, it could be used as a weapon, but so could any number of items found in cars. I bet every car in the parking lot had a tire iron it it, which is easily as dengerous as a 2" pocket knife. Not to mention screwdrivers.

The 6 year old thing is just idiotic. They should have taken it away from him and made his parents come pick it up.

They tyranny of the stupid marches on.

Yes sniper you can't let everybody carry. They are kids out there that should nit have knives. They would seriously hurt someone. And you guys that say just don't let them have em. Who decides who can't have them? I can think of several kids that are bat**** crazy but have those in charge snowed.

Jeff,
Let's see if your tolerance for others' needs extends to your cocoon-like workplace. I'm sure everywhere you worked had employees like you; stable and conscientious, empathetic to the feelings and needs of their co-workers. Or maybe not. By your measure, it doesn't matter, as long as someone feels they "need" to do something or carry whatever they think they need and for whatever purpose.

Therefore, you wouldn't mind if someone exercised that "need" and carried a box cutter in their pocket or maybe a revolver, small caliber that is. After all, every one of your former and current co-workers are responsible adults, not a bunch of pre-pubescent, immature grammar school kids, some with issues. Probably even a few former Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts too.

" Too many people spend too much time worrying about what might happen, and trying to ensure that it does not. They use that as justification to control others' lives; in my opinion, to an entirely unacceptable degree."

You sound liberal. How many guns and how much ammo were you hoarding during the orange alert days? How many middle-eastern looking people did you stereotype as bomb-carrying terrorists? Were you part of the crowd requesting they all be taken to relocation camps? If not, maybe I won't bother looking up your comments in the archives.

Now get back to work.

Sherwood

I would have absolutely no trouble with any of that. As a matter of fact, I would probably welcome it. See Kurt V.'s thread on his "bad day" for some more insight on this.

None. I am an active match competitor, so I do need to keep enough ammo loaded for that. I suppose to someone like you, who would dealry love to tell me how much I "need", any quantity above your own arbitrary limit would be considered "hoarding".

None.

No.

Knock yourself out.

I'm not at work.

I can't fathom anyone with a synapse that makes it across the great divide somehow equated a Swiss Army knife, personal responsibility and a desire to return to rational, thought-based application of punishment with relocation camps.

I run my own business, I am at work. I decide...and I want you and all the other government first, zero tolerance zombies out of my life.

Exactly. Seems we are continually reminded, by Sherwood's type, of just how out of this world their though process can run.

This started with a kid wanting to eat lunch with his new, Boy Scout issued multi-tool at school. For guys like Sherwood, any of us that really don't see anything wrong with this have some sort of inadequacies for which we are compensating, see weapons as phalic symbols, and advocate putting people in relocation camps. Seems like a reasonable train of thought to me...:rolleyes:

That pretty well sums it up. These folks can keep their worries, their hand-wringing fretting to themselves. They can leave me out of it.

i don't think you can bring rope to school for knot tying demonstrations anymore either.

head down, eyes forward is what they teach kids now.

Submit motherfkers.

this is not at all what prompted Sherwoods comments.

Sherwoods comments stemmed from your statement that real men start carrying knives as boys.

and he was right, that kind of attitude smacks of a napolean complex. people that define themselves by their willingness to carry a weapon on their belt at all times are definitely not hitting on all 6.