So when you get jumped in a hallway, a concussion so hard you black out, multiple broken ribs from being kicked while on the ground & then you wake up in a hospital with no memory of the event, you should consider that it is OK you got suspended for getting your ass beat?
A good example of my point. So you don't even care if the policy helps other kids avoid that same fate, it's just a point of principle to you and you're happy to see them go to hospital with concussion?
It's hard to guess why you've interpreted their comment as being "happy to see them go to hospital with concussion".
But I would suggest that in a debate over whether or not it's a good idea to punish children who are innocent (e.g. being attacked in a one-sided "fight"), the onus is on you to demonstrate that there are benefits to the approach, not on others to demonstrate that punishing innocent kids, or people in general, isn't a bad idea.
