Where would journalists be without willing “experts” to espouse idiotic positions that constitute the “other side of the story”? Today’s ever-so-helpful idiot is Charles P.Ewing, professor of law and psychology at the world-famous University of Buffalo Law School.
Professor Ewing serves the important function of idiot in a NYT story that begins…:
“Finding character witnesses when you are 6 years old is not easy. But there was Zachary Christie last week at a school disciplinary committee hearing with his karate instructor and his mother’s fiancé by his side to vouch for him.
Zachary’s offense? Taking a Cub Scout utensil that can serve as a knife, fork and spoon to school. He was so excited about joining the Scouts that he wanted to use it at lunch. School officials concluded that he had violated their zero-tolerance policy on weapons, and Zachary now faces 45 days in the district’s reform school.”
The piece by Ian Urbina goes on to recount other incredibly stupid overreactions to “weapons” at other schools, including a case where a third-grader was expelled for a year because her grandmother sent her to school with a cake and a knife to cut it with.
So fifteen or so paragraphs of this and the only problem is that we haven’t heard the “other side of the story”. Who can possibly think it’s a good idea to expel a student for a year because of a cake knife? Who with any “expertise” outside a good working knowledge of a crack pipe could possibly agree with a decision that suspends a six-year old 45 days for a Cub Scout multi-utensil?
Professor Charles P. Ewing, that’s who. He’s your man, Times writer Ian Urbina, and one can only imagine how many six-packs of beer Mr. Urbina owes Professor Ewing for:
“’There are still serious threats every day in schools,’ Dr. Ewing said, adding that giving school officials discretion holds the potential for discrimination and requires the kind of threat assessments that only law enforcement is equipped to make.”
One can only imagine how long journalist Ian Urbina had to dig finding someone stupid enough to say the above (and, notably, the only direct quote is very generic and doesn’t say anything about the specific cases mentioned).
So let us this morning salute idiot “expert” Professor Charles P. Ewing. One doesn’t need to be a working journalist to see how important the work of idiots like Ewing is to our understanding of the world around us.
Thanks Chuck Ewing. Can I call you Chuck? Trust me, it’s better than some other terms I’d like to use.