Crime and Punishment: Why the Samo Justice System Needs to be Reformed

In past weeks, the vast majority of students at Samo will have received a house principal visit in one of their classes, with the purpose of educating -- which seemed more like scaring -- the students about school discipline policies. These presentations are mandatory, and the house principals are given a slideshow with material some of them have never seen before, detailing the specifics of what constitutes a crime and what punishments await each offense.During the presentation I was given, the administrator answered every teeming question the kids in my class posed. But I think that was the problem in its essence: there were too many questions. I suppose the problem I have with the judicial system existed in the very slideshow, and extends greatly to Samo, and the district, as a whole. First of all, I feel that the slideshow, and the rules presented in the slideshow, are, in some ways, a concoction of outdated and ludicrous claims, including that excessive tickling is a form of sexual harassment, and that there can’t be any “suggestive dancing”, with respect to others, your partner, and yourself (which is oddly reminiscent of Footloose in the 90’s). In my humble opinion, the punishments created for first-time offenders -- acting out of what could be deemed pretty normal teenage behavior -- just don’t fit the crime.Recently, several students have been disciplined for drinking at school events. All these students have received the SMMUSD mandatory consequence: five days of suspension, 40 hours of community service, 24 hours of alcohol counselling (12 additional for their parents), four weeks of academic probation (in which grades are monitored closely) and removal from all extracurricular events happening in this time. Some of these students may even have their out-of-district permits revoked. And regardless of the degree of involvement in the drinking, all  students received the same punishment, regardless of their level of involvement. These consequences, unfortunately, meant that they couldn’t participate in athletics, arts performances, field trips, or attend games. Also, this punishment also served to put them each a week behind in school.Looking at these consequences, and knowing that this is the first offense for some of these students, I wonder if the punishment fits the crime.  I think it’s fair to assume that the majority of high school kids will partake in drinking alcoholic beverages multiple times throughout their high school career. It was truly unfortunate that these students made the mistake of drinking at a school function. They recognize what they did, and of course, since it was a school event, they need to receive some form of consequence under school policy but isn’t the extent to which they were punished somewhat questionable in the modern age?Personally, I believe that in order to reel in the insanity of the consequences, we have to propose some modernized alternatives that still serve as appropriate punishment.Being in possession of an alcoholic beverage isn’t really a crime that should be punishable by losing a week of learning. That’s like taking a massive sick leave, only with a fully-functioning mind. Forcing students to stay at home by themselves isn’t really productive in any way. Yes, it gives students a time to think and reflect on what they’ve done, but at what cost? And during this week, the students are free to do as they please (albeit with possible considerable limitations based on parental consequences); it’s essentially an extra holiday, while you’re just becoming further and further behind in all classes and clubs. And the students who were recently suspended have confirmed that when they were suspended, they were simply told not to come to school, and not given any guidelines as to what to do with their time off, like making up the massive amount of schoolwork they missed. It seems to me like administration just gave out consequences without truly realizing why or how that would affect these students.Three years ago, we had a similar incidence occur when the choirs took a trip to Europe, and three 18-year-old girls ordered beers at a bar. They were suspended and had to face the same punishments that are intact today, such as not being allowed to participate in school events for 4 weeks after. Unfortunately for them, within these 4 weeks, was their graduation. Luckily for them, their parents had influence and went to the school board, launching a massive debate on the topic, with the ultimate resolution that the girls could walk the stage with the rest of their class. This shows that the school board recognized the fact that the punishments were unnecessarily harsh,  and that they were going to interfere with the personal well-being of the girls and dramatically affect their lives.I grow tired of the defense that arises when we talk about this issue, especially when people say “it’s way worse in Texas.” Guess what, we’re not in a state with open-carry laws and where the color red dominates the political landscape; we’re in California, and Santa Monica, no less! This begs the question, once again, as to whether or not it’s fair to use one-size-fits-all punishments with no wiggle room.And it’s not just the consequences for alcohol and drug-related crimes that I’m calling into question, it’s most of the consequences Samo doles out in general in the name of discipline. For example, it is unclear how the threat of receiving a Saturday school for excessive tardies deters that behavior.   How does it address the root of the problem, and actually cause change?  These are questions that are asked time and time again, and it’s essential that they are finally answered once and for all.Thus, I think it’s time we truly re-evaluate exactly how the district-wide judicial system is working, and look specifically at some of the rules that are in place that simply don’t make sense through a contemporary viewpoint. It’s only when we can reach a compromise between students and administration as to fair punishments for actions necessary of discipline, that we can truly accept the terms of the justice system. On the bright side, the discipline policies have become less draconian over the years. And I’m pleased that the state of California and Samo by extension are moving in the direction of restorative justice and counselling as a means of redressing harms by without extraneous and unnecessary consequences, but it’s not to the extent that the students deserve. In the case of many students,  one or two days of suspension, as well as the community service can suffice to teach them a lesson. I feel like their punishment was a harbinger for change to come, and well-deserved change at that.