At the start of every school year, schools distribute to parents and students a statement of their policies. One of them is that students are prohibited from carrying to school weapons or facsimiles of weapons. Students who violate these policies face up to a year's suspension from school.

It's a substantial consequence, but school administrators are bound to uphold the law. These suspensions can be appealed, however. School districts can provide alternative schooling for suspended students, whether at home, in another school or in a classroom by themselves.

Obviously, no student should bring a weapon or a look-alike to school. It not only violates school policy, it could conceivably endanger classmates, school employees and the student himself. Some guns shoot only plastic projectiles yet they closely resemble real firearms, which could result in a tragic outcome should police be placed in a position to make a split-second decision about a student carrying a weapon.

One can argue that zero-tolerance policies free school administrators from the appearance of favoritism. "Student A" who brings a real weapon or look-alike weapon to school is treated the same as Student B.

But blanket policies do not recognize intent or the facts of an event. Common sense demands that the case of a student who brings a loaded firearm into a school should be handled differently than a mischievous kindergartener who brings a squirt gun to school on a hot day in May. Unfortunately, the law leaves no immediate wiggle room for school administrators to make those kinds of judgments.

Many of these issues are resolved in appeals processes, of course. But wouldn't a better course be to empower local school officials to mete out appropriate punishments instead of conforming to a lock-step policy?

Absent that, parents need to understand these policies and help their children comply with them. They're intended to enhance school safety, although the top-down administration leaves a lot to be desired.