I have a hard time imagining any tattoo machine being viewed as a weapon - even Byron himself says that the tool doesn't even work unless it's plugged in, and then it's contained to a very small area, so it's not as if it could be used to hurt others against their will or without their knowledge. However....and this is a big however...if you take a look at the tool in question on the news article page, it is clearly a poorly made device using various odds and ends that cannot be sterilized. Sure, he says he's going to tattoo fruit for now, but how long would it take for him to either get bored with fruit or assume he'd learned enough to start practicing on people? And if that were the case, could the "gun" be considered something capable of causing bodily harm? You betcha.
On the other hand, though, did the boy deserve a three-month expulsion simply for possessing the device? What about the kid that made the thing? Unless he was actually caught using the machine on fellow students, I think confiscation and a call home would have been sufficient punishment. What do you think? Did the school have the right to take such severe action against Byron? Or did their own ignorance toward the word "gun" cause them to over-react? Use the comment section below to share your thoughts!