Zero Tolerance is always a terrible idea. It is never appropriate and the people who institute it are of a particular type that does not value thoughtfulness.
Your second example illustrates the need to treat people differently according to how they should be treated and the rules should be a mere guideline. In criminal law, I recommend that we have people whose job it is to decide what is fair and what is right — maybe call them 'judgors'. Applying the law without thought is immoral.
In philosophy, I we should make a distinction between morality and the law — they are intended to solve different problems — and justice is a moral thing, not a legal thing.
Zero Tolerance is always a terrible idea. It is never appropriate and the people who institute it are of a particular type that does not value thoughtfulness.
Your second example illustrates the need to treat people differently according to how they should be treated and the rules should be a mere guideline. In criminal law, I recommend that we have people whose job it is to decide what is fair and what is right — maybe call them 'judgors'. Applying the law without thought is immoral.
In philosophy, I we should make a distinction between morality and the law — they are intended to solve different problems — and justice is a moral thing, not a legal thing.