No need for hyperbole. Body armor for kids is illogical and you know it. But it is also illogical to assume we are going to get rid of the hundreds of millions of guns in the US. It is illogical to assume that more laws will change the behavior of somebody who doesn’t care to follow laws in the first place. We need SROs back in schools. We also need to hold kids accountable for the little things so school environments don’t get so out of control that big things can happen. |
| We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws. |
What would that look like? And how will you get someone who doesn’t follow existing laws to follow the new ones? |
Not at all. We do this all the time with laws. When people say, "A law won't work because of people who break the law," what that really means is, "I don't want that law." |
Law enforcement. (Seems like that would go without saying, but evidently not.) |
+1000 |
This. We need to implement appropriate consequences for kids so that they know they are being held accountable for good behavior. |
We already have gun laws. Heck, kids aren't supposed to be smoking weed at school - yet, the bathrooms are filled with weed, and fentanyl and other drugs. We have drug laws, but those don't keep drugs out of our schools. We have laws about bomb threats, but we now know that those don't apply to kids under the age of 13. So, we still had a rash of bomb threats in MCPS. We have laws protecting kids from sexual assault, but we have rapes in our schools. |
Voters and our County politicians do NOT want law enforcement in our schools. They have made that clear. The politics of this county do not support law enforcement in our schools. |
Agree with all of this. My HS kid took Health last year and there were at least 5 students who pretty much NEVER attended the class. |
Voters and our County politicians also do NOT want guns in our schools. Also, fortunately, we don't need to have law enforcement in our schools in order to enforce general, common-sense gun laws. |
And so therefore we should just get rid of laws about drugs, bombs, and sexual assaults? Is that what you're saying? There are laws against murder, but people still murder, therefore we shouldn't have laws against murder? |
DP. It’s pointless to throw MORE laws around when the EXISTING laws aren’t followed or enforced. I’m all for gun control, but I’m also a realist. Do you think gun violence is always being committed by people who own the guns lawfully? If a person is willing to break the law, won’t they be willing to break one or two more? So fine… write all the gun laws you want. Then what? NOTHING will change without enforcement. Someone upthread said we don’t need police in schools. We just need more gun laws. Again: how will that help? More laws and no enforcement? When it comes down to reason and logic: the schools need security and the EXISTING rules enforced. Let’s start there. |
If we just had adequate gun control, all this nonsense would be superfluous. |
So you're saying MCPD isn't doing its job? |