Zero Tolerance and Guns

Here's an article on a 6-year old you brought a clear plastic toy gun to school and expelled: http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/10/06/toy.gun.expelled/index.html?hpt=T1

Guns don't belong in schools, but a zero tolerance policy shows that the school administrative personnel are not capable of evaluating the behavior of a child, and coming to an appropriately graded punishment.

I disagree with saying that zero Tolerance is another way of saying, "Look we don't feel like doing our job. It's too hard. We do this for the money, not for the kids.". Behind almost every stupid law, rule and product label is fear of liability. It's easy to sit back and say, "That's a ridiculous application of an overly strict law", and that would be correct. But if another child at that school had brought in a pellet gun and shot this 6 year old in the eye, damaging his vision, his parents would no doubt sue the school for having failed to prevent it. This superintendant won't lose his job for kicking this 6-year old out of school, but he sure as hell would have lost his job if he hadn't acted and a kid got hurt.

The social calculus for zero tolerance sentencing for actual crimes are the same. There's no disincentive for being overly harsh (no one votes out a politician because the prisons are expensive and overcrowded, and a single unfair sentence only costs a few votes), while there's a huge disincentive to try and be fair at the risk of occasional recidivism (see: Michael Dukakis).

The consequences of an overly litigious society are inflexible and frequently unjust laws.