6 ms·

Just to be clear, we're talking about combining a mechanical pencil and a rubber band to launch BBs, tooth picks, etc? These are "weapons" in the sense that n

Just to be clear, we're talking about combining a mechanical pencil and a rubber band to launch BBs, tooth picks, etc? These are "weapons" in the sense that nerf guns are, maybe enough to trigger hysterical zero tolerance rules but certainly not enough to actually threaten anybody with sense. They only have as much power as a rubber band. You can (and we did) get better results using just the rubber band stretched between your thumb and index finger. You can launch a pencil clear across the room like that.. but you could also just throw the pencil. Treating these as real weapons, let alone zip-guns, is an absolute farce. Zero tolerance means zero thought.

dontbenebby 4y ago
>Treating these as real weapons, let alone zip-guns, is an absolute farce. Zero tolerance means zero thought. Agreed, but unfortunately no one ever gave me a stable job where I could post stuff like that from. I've bounced from precarious role to precarious role for over a decade.
defterGoose 4y ago
While I generally agree with the points you make, I have to disagree that there's zero difference between "throwing a pebble [toothpick, pencil, etc]" and making an improvised device to launch a projectile. Sure, you could put out an eye either way, but only one of those methods is designed specifically with the goal of accurate, repeatable assault. You could very well define such a device as a weapon, whereas defining someone's arms as weapons is trickier based on their use cases and legal precedent. If I throw a pencil and it sticks in someone's eye it was a freak accident and I'm only liable up to that standard. If I shoot a person in the eye with an improvised device, then it's much easier to argue that I meant to do it.
- dontbenebby 4y ago
  >If I throw a pencil and it sticks in someone's eye it was a freak accident and I'm only liable up to that standard. That's a folk belief. If you throw a pencil like that in my left eye, I might use the right one to aim the shot that kills you, and in Pennsylvania I'd be legally in the right under stand your ground, as well as several other states. Please don't confuse your opinions about ethics with very well tested facts about how the world works, you could get yourself killed, and if I didn't care about that I'd let you continue on your dangerous path of thinking. No one is obligated to tolerate violence, and I worry that those who refuse to understand that are a danger to themselves AND others via the chaos they induce.
  - defterGoose 4y ago
    What?

dontbenebby 4y ago

>Treating these as real weapons, let alone zip-guns, is an absolute farce. Zero tolerance means zero thought. Agreed, but unfortunately no one ever gave me a stable job where I could post stuff like that from. I've bounced from precarious role to precarious role for over a decade.

defterGoose 4y ago

While I generally agree with the points you make, I have to disagree that there's zero difference between "throwing a pebble [toothpick, pencil, etc]" and making an improvised device to launch a projectile. Sure, you could put out an eye either way, but only one of those methods is designed specifically with the goal of accurate, repeatable assault. You could very well define such a device as a weapon, whereas defining someone's arms as weapons is trickier based on their use cases and legal precedent. If I throw a pencil and it sticks in someone's eye it was a freak accident and I'm only liable up to that standard. If I shoot a person in the eye with an improvised device, then it's much easier to argue that I meant to do it.

dontbenebby 4y ago
>If I throw a pencil and it sticks in someone's eye it was a freak accident and I'm only liable up to that standard. That's a folk belief. If you throw a pencil like that in my left eye, I might use the right one to aim the shot that kills you, and in Pennsylvania I'd be legally in the right under stand your ground, as well as several other states. Please don't confuse your opinions about ethics with very well tested facts about how the world works, you could get yourself killed, and if I didn't care about that I'd let you continue on your dangerous path of thinking. No one is obligated to tolerate violence, and I worry that those who refuse to understand that are a danger to themselves AND others via the chaos they induce.
- defterGoose 4y ago
  What?