ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES ARE FLAWED : WHY ISN'T
ANYONE LISTENING ?............. ( Article by Professor Hu Chi Ku Chi )

Zero tolerance simply equates to zero judgement for bridge club officers.  These rule bound , rigid , inflexible keepers of the peace only act on what is laid down as best behaviour code of conduct , imposing punishments on all who are deemed to have committed rule violations no matter how small....... and certainly never taking into account any mitigating circumstances.
This blind and blinkered approach to enforcing rules come-what-may compels me to raise that warning flag.  Indeed , whenever a club committee adheres to a one-size-fit-all policy injustice will rear its ugly head for sure. There will be a list of unresolved issues when punishment seems unjust and unfair , akin to using a sledge hammer to crack a small nut. Those who dish out unwarranted and disproportionate punishment will either look foolish or vindictive. 
Zero tolerance does in my view has an important part to play in addressing gross misconduct , but in other situations where rule violations are petty and insignificant such draconian policies are flawed. Surely to god there are other preventative measures which can be put in place to improve behaviour without using the proverbial sledge hammer. I'm all in favour of progressive fines as money tends to have a sobering effect on most people. 
What upsets me more than anything is seeing punishment handed out to the innocent for crimes committed by the guilty. Why should a player be reprimanded for showing his /her disapproval  ( with a few well chosen words ) to a slow player. This kind of villain , who one could unfortunately be following all night around the room ,  not only disrupts the play , but also likely to hold up the whole movement ,  often causing the last round of boards to be forfeited. 
ZT policies are by definition inflexible , harsh and lacking in common sense. Law enforcement officers , or should I say bridge police , need to apply both compassion and discretion when mitigating circumstances can clearly be established.
In common law the starting point is always establish a general rule , but over the years in the interests of justice wisdom has prevailed as learned judges introduce exceptions to the rule , and then where necessary exceptions to the exceptions. Everything is judged in effect on the merits of the case , where mitigating circumstances will always be explored and acknowledged. 
Therefore within the framework of ZT policies , there needs to be a measure of flexibility and movement in order to establish a reasonable and fair minded response. Bringing a knife into a club with intent to harm someone is one thing , but bringing a knife in to use in self defence is another.