What's wrong with this picture in Pennsylvania?
Let's see, two more otherwise untroublesome students have been suspended and were in danger of expulsion from their school in Allegheny, PA, due to their violation of a "zero-tolerance" policy. Did they threaten a teacher? Pull a knife in class? Wave a joint around? Nah, they had BB guns in their cars when they went to football practice.
BB guns. In the car. Not necessarily loaded, not being used, just in the car. At a football practice that was not on school grounds.
How did the school know about it? Why, a passing motorist saw the rifles in the car and called 911. Can't be too careful with those BB guns, you know - you could put someone's eye out. Or help destroy two innocent students' burgeoning athletic careers and academic records.
On the other hand, if you turn over desks during class in a Philadelphia inner-city school, grab a pair of scissors, and threaten to cut open the face of the boy you're fighting with, the school's principal may decide to wait a week before notifying the police, and he may even smooth things over by not mentioning that nasty stabbing threat. The end result may be teacher resignations, school investigation, and ugly controversy, but hey, a 10-year-old girl with multiple disciplinary infractions and a yen for violence deserves a second chance.
What is going on? Is this an open admission that suburban students are held to a much higher standard of behavior than inner-city students? Do we expect one group to be perfect and just hope the other group doesn't kill anyone? Are zero-tolerance rules necessary to guide empty-headed principals such as the one in Philadelphia?