slag
Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 10,473
- 81
- 101
Umm, you go to the school canteen and pick your meal from the menu. They serve you and give you a knife and fork to eat it with.
OH, lol.. I thought you meant they brought it from home.
Umm, you go to the school canteen and pick your meal from the menu. They serve you and give you a knife and fork to eat it with.
Umm, you go to the school canteen and pick your meal from the menu. They serve you and give you a knife and fork to eat it with.
In this case, the school is providing it as a necessary instrument for eating. Not a big deal. Should the students start taking them out of the lunchroom, it becomes a different matter entirely. What we are referring to was bringing in the items from home.
When I was in HS, we did archery for gym class. Using the school's bow and arrows was not a big deal. But I can guarantee you they'd flip out if you started walking into school with a bow and arrows on your back. The mere fact that the school provided the items with supervision was the key difference, and applies in this case as well.
Your equating a butter knife with a bow and arrow? What was that you said about sensationalist posts earlier?
His analogy is simple. When the school supplies them, and watches over you with them, it is different than allowing them to be brought in on their own.
His analogy is simple. When the school supplies them, and watches over you with them, it is different than allowing them to be brought in on their own.
Never did I equate a butter knife's lethality to that of a bow and arrow. I said that was the policy and the same enforcement of the policy would apply in your situation.
How is my kid using his own cutlery at lunch any different to using school cutlery at lunch?
Remember these are butter knives and the like not 12" bowie knives.
Although I have no problem with the school only allowing their knives if they provide them as needed.
Having them outside the lunchroom is where the difference lies. If a kid knows he's not supposed to take it out of the lunchroom and he does, it shows a little more intent than just "I need it for lunch" and removes a lot of the ambiguity people are complaining about.
So in a conversation about cutlery the first, nearest thing you thought of was a bow and arrow?
No sensationalist undertones there at all.
Zero tolerance is zero tolerance, there is no appealing. What don't you understand about that?
At my kids school if they take a packed lunch they leave it on a trolley in the canteen when they arrive at school. They don't have it with them in the classroom.
It was a simple analogy of something that actually happened at my school. I guess next time I should alter the details so that you don't get so stuck up in them you miss the entire point of the post.
The articles regarding the kid who made a chicken nugget in the shape of a gun wasn't a sensationalism because it actually happened. The people shouting "Hands can be used as weapons, lets take those too!" are guilty of sensationalism because they are using purposefully ludicrous and ridiculous situations that won't happen just to try and bolster a weak or non-existant stance.
And that doesn't happen in most schools, at least none that I know of. Home lunches were accessible at pretty much any time.
As are you for saying 'I couldn't take in a bow and arrow, you can't take in a butter knife. It's totally the same! '
Which is a better solution, storing kids meals in a cool, safe environment or banning random items?
Like... a lunchbox?
The US's level of lunchbox technology must be vastly superior if you require your sandwiches to be in the fridge for the 4 hours between when you arrive and when you have lunch.
EDIT:
Just thought of something. WB, does your kid go to a small school (150 or less)? Smaller school and/or private school dynamics are much more different than a large public school (not a sensationalism). I went to a small private school until 9th grade, at which I went to a large public school. Huge difference in how things are and can be handled. It would also explain a lot of your viewpoint on the matter and why we disagree.
4 hours? the schools near us have lunch from 10-2. so it can be 2.5 hours to 6 hours. but t hose are large schools.
My daughters school is small. 100 students so they have lunch at one time. the kids can put the lunch in a fridge if they want and heat it up in microwaves.
but the school also makes everything fresh that day. a lot of schools have it shipped in pre-made then warm it up.
How is my kid using his own cutlery at lunch any different to using school cutlery at lunch?
Remember these are butter knives and the like not 12" bowie knives.
Although I have no problem with the school only allowing their knives if they provide them as needed.
Missed most of this convo, but my school never had any utensils beyond sporks. It was actually the same sporks since elementary school to high school.
Simple.
It is easier to have a pile of plastic butter knives ready than to have to keep your eye out and inspect every knife that comes into the school at lunchtime.
We already know that the taxpayer is unwilling to pay more money for schools in general, how do you think they will respond to having to have another lunch aid just to help check everyone's cutlery?
I'm still missing the need to examine everyone's cutlery. Has there been a massive spate of people being buttered to death that I've missed?
I'm still missing the need to examine everyone's cutlery. Has there been a massive spate of people being buttered to death that I've missed?
