Reinstate School Resource Officers at MCPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

m
A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

They handpicked seven ultra liberal students including two in middle school who had never seen an SRO. They were given talking points which included one knucklehead who said she didn’t want the police staring at her when she changed classes and looking to arrest her. She was in the seventh grade and her parents were Jawando friends. This is a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

m
A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

They handpicked seven ultra liberal students including two in middle school who had never seen an SRO. They were given talking points which included one knucklehead who said she didn’t want the police staring at her when she changed classes and looking to arrest her. She was in the seventh grade and her parents were Jawando friends. This is a fact.

It's all part of the liberal conspiracy to demilitarize police in schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot didn't testify. A handful did who are a select group of attention seekers. So, what is your better suggestion since you don't want SRO's or security in the schools.

Clearly more kids are being harmed by violence now than are from the SRO's.

Stop it with your Fox News propaganda.
Everybody wants security in schools. People in don't want useless SROs.

Do you have kids in mcps? What is your suggestion? I want them. This is mcps news, not Fox News.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

m
A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

They handpicked seven ultra liberal students including two in middle school who had never seen an SRO. They were given talking points which included one knucklehead who said she didn’t want the police staring at her when she changed classes and looking to arrest her. She was in the seventh grade and her parents were Jawando friends. This is a fact.

It's all part of the liberal conspiracy to demilitarize police in schools.

LOL seems like they're not getting the traction they'd hoped for with this Fox news talking point. Guess they'll get back to masks or maybe CRT next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

m
A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

They handpicked seven ultra liberal students including two in middle school who had never seen an SRO. They were given talking points which included one knucklehead who said she didn’t want the police staring at her when she changed classes and looking to arrest her. She was in the seventh grade and her parents were Jawando friends. This is a fact.

It's all part of the liberal conspiracy to demilitarize police in schools.

LOL seems like they're not getting the traction they'd hoped for with this Fox news talking point. Guess they'll get back to masks or maybe CRT next.

one can hope

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot didn't testify. A handful did who are a select group of attention seekers. So, what is your better suggestion since you don't want SRO's or security in the schools.

Clearly more kids are being harmed by violence now than are from the SRO's.

Stop it with your Fox News propaganda.
Everybody wants security in schools. People in don't want useless SROs.

Do you have kids in mcps? What is your suggestion? I want them. This is mcps news, not Fox News.

I had a kid graduated from MCPS and I have kids now in MCPS. People already gave you suggestions but you just want to cling on your useless SROs so your Larla and Larlo can feel safe.
"Don't want security in schools" is Fox News and Q propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot didn't testify. A handful did who are a select group of attention seekers. So, what is your better suggestion since you don't want SRO's or security in the schools.

Clearly more kids are being harmed by violence now than are from the SRO's.

Stop it with your Fox News propaganda.
Everybody wants security in schools. People in don't want useless SROs.

Do you have kids in mcps? What is your suggestion? I want them. This is mcps news, not Fox News.

I had a kid graduated from MCPS and I have kids now in MCPS. People already gave you suggestions but you just want to cling on your useless SROs so your Larla and Larlo can feel safe.
"Don't want security in schools" is Fox News and Q propaganda.

There aren't suggestions. We are being told no SRO's. Mental health services aren't going to happen and that doesn't stop violence. The discussion is stopping violence.

SRO's are funded by the police department. MCPS has yet to put any extra security in place or mental health (or more parenting classes as well). So, what are practical solutions that can be implemented. Violence is going up with RJ and the removal of SRO's, not down this year.

[Anonymous]

SROs are not useless. My children are at WJ, and a couple of years ago (pre-Covid), a student told the SRO about a former student living in Baltimore who was posting messages on SM with an assault rifle, threatening to shoot up the school. Former student was arrested and put in jail before anything bad happened. Don't tell me SROs are useless, because you are wrong.

Just one example of many good things SROs do (did).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SROs are not useless. My children are at WJ, and a couple of years ago (pre-Covid), a student told the SRO about a former student living in Baltimore who was posting messages on SM with an assault rifle, threatening to shoot up the school. Former student was arrested and put in jail before anything bad happened. Don't tell me SROs are useless, because you are wrong.

Just one example of many good things SROs do (did).

Anecdotes are not evidence. In this example, the student could have just as easily reported to the police department.

The evidence that does exist, the actual data, show few associations between SROs and reductions of violence (and absolutely no association with school shootings, btw).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SROs are not useless. My children are at WJ, and a couple of years ago (pre-Covid), a student told the SRO about a former student living in Baltimore who was posting messages on SM with an assault rifle, threatening to shoot up the school. Former student was arrested and put in jail before anything bad happened. Don't tell me SROs are useless, because you are wrong.

Just one example of many good things SROs do (did).

Anecdotes are not evidence. In this example, the student could have just as easily reported to the police department.

The evidence that does exist, the actual data, show few associations between SROs and reductions of violence (and absolutely no association with school shootings, btw).

The point was they knew the SRO and were comfortable with the SRO and told. Most people would rather talk to someone they know vs. calling 911. Most kids would not call 911 to report. Be ral.

There are lots of positive stories on SRO's but you are just too closed minded to hear them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SROs are not useless. My children are at WJ, and a couple of years ago (pre-Covid), a student told the SRO about a former student living in Baltimore who was posting messages on SM with an assault rifle, threatening to shoot up the school. Former student was arrested and put in jail before anything bad happened. Don't tell me SROs are useless, because you are wrong.

Just one example of many good things SROs do (did).

Anecdotes are not evidence. In this example, the student could have just as easily reported to the police department.

The evidence that does exist, the actual data, show few associations between SROs and reductions of violence (and absolutely no association with school shootings, btw).

The point was they knew the SRO and were comfortable with the SRO and told. Most people would rather talk to someone they know vs. calling 911. Most kids would not call 911 to report. Be ral.

There are lots of positive stories on SRO's but you are just too closed minded to hear them.

And you’re too biased and convinced you know best to actually look at the evidence. You know the saying… when you assume things, you make a @.. out of yourself.

https://www.edworkingpapers.com/ai21-476

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SROs are not useless. My children are at WJ, and a couple of years ago (pre-Covid), a student told the SRO about a former student living in Baltimore who was posting messages on SM with an assault rifle, threatening to shoot up the school. Former student was arrested and put in jail before anything bad happened. Don't tell me SROs are useless, because you are wrong.

Just one example of many good things SROs do (did).

Anecdotes are not evidence. In this example, the student could have just as easily reported to the police department.

The evidence that does exist, the actual data, show few associations between SROs and reductions of violence (and absolutely no association with school shootings, btw).

The point was they knew the SRO and were comfortable with the SRO and told. Most people would rather talk to someone they know vs. calling 911. Most kids would not call 911 to report. Be ral.

There are lots of positive stories on SRO's but you are just too closed minded to hear them.

And you’re too biased and convinced you know best to actually look at the evidence. You know the saying… when you assume things, you make a @.. out of yourself.

https://www.edworkingpapers.com/ai21-476

Well, that's pretty damning:

U.S. public school students increasingly attend schools with sworn law enforcement officers present. Yet, little is known about how these school resource officers (SROs) affect school environments or student outcomes. Our study uses a fuzzy regression discontinuity (RD) design with national school-level data from 2014 to 2018 to estimate the impacts of SRO placement. We construct this discontinuity based on the application scores of nearby police agencies for federal school-based policing grants. We find that SROs do effectively reduce some forms of violence in schools, but do not prevent school shootings or gun-related incidents. We also find that SROs intensify the use of suspensions, expulsions, police referrals, and arrests of students. These effects are consistently over two times larger for Black students than White students. Finally, we observe that SROs increase chronic absenteeism, particularly for students with disabilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot didn't testify. A handful did who are a select group of attention seekers. So, what is your better suggestion since you don't want SRO's or security in the schools.

Clearly more kids are being harmed by violence now than are from the SRO's.

Stop it with your Fox News propaganda.
Everybody wants security in schools. People in don't want useless SROs.

Do you have kids in mcps? What is your suggestion? I want them. This is mcps news, not Fox News.

I had a kid graduated from MCPS and I have kids now in MCPS. People already gave you suggestions but you just want to cling on your useless SROs so your Larla and Larlo can feel safe.
"Don't want security in schools" is Fox News and Q propaganda.

There aren't suggestions. We are being told no SRO's. Mental health services aren't going to happen and that doesn't stop violence. The discussion is stopping violence.

SRO's are funded by the police department. MCPS has yet to put any extra security in place or mental health (or more parenting classes as well). So, what are practical solutions that can be implemented. Violence is going up with RJ and the removal of SRO's, not down this year.

Again more fox news and Q propagandas. Violence is not up because of RJ and the removal of SROs. That's what fox news wants you to believe. Violence is up all over the country, not just schools because of the effect of the pandemic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with this whole debate is inherent bias about *who* is a risk. For the most part, school violence happens from within the school (ie other students). Security measures are often designed to keep outsiders from getting in. Students who go to these schools everyday know the blind spots of security anyway. All the metal detectors, SROs etc are doing is making parents feel better. At the same time, those very security measures do two not so great things for students: they increase fear and feelings of not being safe (and yes there are studies on this) and second they increase disproportionate removals of students of color and with disabilities. Security measures don’t prevent violence.

MCPS is wrong for not getting enough mental health support in the doors quickly enough and not connecting with community providers. Bringing back SROs isn’t going to fix that.

SROs don't accomplish much of anything but make the right-wing extremists feel better by making public schools (which they hate) have more of a prison feel.

Metal detectors, too.

Exactly.

What is your proposal because No SRO's and we've had multiple incidents at the "good" schools. One of those knife fights could have been deadly. We've also had more assaults on campus in locker rooms.

There have always been multiple incidents at the "good schools", even when there were SROs.

Instead of removing them we need more.

Because adding more of something that’s ineffective is going to make it effective? How does that logic work?

SROs are not only ineffective, they’re harmful. We don’t need more of them.

They are not harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot of students testified that they are harmful. What is your suggestion?

A lot didn't testify. A handful did who are a select group of attention seekers. So, what is your better suggestion since you don't want SRO's or security in the schools.

Clearly more kids are being harmed by violence now than are from the SRO's.

Stop it with your Fox News propaganda.
Everybody wants security in schools. People in don't want useless SROs.

Do you have kids in mcps? What is your suggestion? I want them. This is mcps news, not Fox News.

I had a kid graduated from MCPS and I have kids now in MCPS. People already gave you suggestions but you just want to cling on your useless SROs so your Larla and Larlo can feel safe.
"Don't want security in schools" is Fox News and Q propaganda.

There aren't suggestions. We are being told no SRO's. Mental health services aren't going to happen and that doesn't stop violence. The discussion is stopping violence.

SRO's are funded by the police department. MCPS has yet to put any extra security in place or mental health (or more parenting classes as well). So, what are practical solutions that can be implemented. Violence is going up with RJ and the removal of SRO's, not down this year.

Again more fox news and Q propagandas. Violence is not up because of RJ and the removal of SROs. That's what fox news wants you to believe. Violence is up all over the country, not just schools because of the effect of the pandemic.

Are you at all following what is going on in MCPS? RJ has started, SRO's removed. Humm.. use some common sense and start parenting your kids.

MCPS incidents are discussed here and many other places online. You should keep up.

If you cannot parent your kids and expect the schools to do it, they need more support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SROs are not useless. My children are at WJ, and a couple of years ago (pre-Covid), a student told the SRO about a former student living in Baltimore who was posting messages on SM with an assault rifle, threatening to shoot up the school. Former student was arrested and put in jail before anything bad happened. Don't tell me SROs are useless, because you are wrong.

Just one example of many good things SROs do (did).

Anecdotes are not evidence. In this example, the student could have just as easily reported to the police department.

The evidence that does exist, the actual data, show few associations between SROs and reductions of violence (and absolutely no association with school shootings, btw).

Yet anecdotes are exactly what led to the county council’s decision. Can we assume, then, that those anecdotes can’t be defined as “actual data” either? The data I suspect some of us would like to see would be MCPS-specific numbers. Survey all MCPS students, all staff, and all parents. What does the community want? Right now, the only MCPS-specific data we have to go on is the principal survey. If that’s any indicator, there is likely a lot of support for the SRO program.

The other problem we face is it’s hard to quantify how much good an SRO can do. It’s more nuanced. It’s like the old toothpaste ad that said a particular brand has prevented 97 million cavities. How would we know that? Likewise, how would we know how many bad outcomes SROs prevented? Nobody can reasonably or accurately track that data. (“I stopped 2 kids from dropping out of school today.” - That data doesn’t exist. You often don’t see positive results for months or years.) That doesn’t mean those good outcomes don’t exist.