Reinstate School Resource Officers at MCPS

[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).

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.

The problem with that stance is that there IS evidence that SROs perpetuate disparities and exclusion of students of color and with disabilities. You combine that with little evidence that SROs are effective. Asking a population that largely isn’t affected by that disparity who gets some sort of misinformed peace of mind from having a police officer in school just perpetuates inequity.

[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).

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.

The county counsel is listing to some guy who couldn't care less about our kids and doesn't have kids in public school. He is not looking after our kids best interests. He's looking for a political career. Anyone who advocates for public schools and has kids should be required to have them in the school.

[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).

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.

The problem with that stance is that there IS evidence that SROs perpetuate disparities and exclusion of students of color and with disabilities. You combine that with little evidence that SROs are effective. Asking a population that largely isn’t affected by that disparity who gets some sort of misinformed peace of mind from having a police officer in school just perpetuates inequity.

But it isn't true. Look at the number of arrests in MCPS schools prior to the SRO program, and after. Numbers are much lower with SROs in schools.

[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).

Seriously? To have evidence you would accept, you'd need to have a kid post on SM and then blow up the school! That is nuts!

And the Einstein kid who mentioned the assault rifle they found in the students car? Is that anecdotal too?

What will it take before you all recognize the value of the SROs? We need them back, and sooner rather than later.

[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).

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.

It isn't hard at all. Every year there are incidents at the schools. A few posters are hyping these in order to push this SRO issue doesn't make this year any different than others. The one thing that's perfectly clear is the county without a zeroes has handled these situations fine. This proves they're unnecessary.

[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).

Seriously? To have evidence you would accept, you'd need to have a kid post on SM and then blow up the school! That is nuts!

And the Einstein kid who mentioned the assault rifle they found in the students car? Is that anecdotal too?

What will it take before you all recognize the value of the SROs? We need them back, and sooner rather than later.

Can the SRO run away from the active shooter at parkland?

[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).

Seriously? To have evidence you would accept, you'd need to have a kid post on SM and then blow up the school! That is nuts!

And the Einstein kid who mentioned the assault rifle they found in the students car? Is that anecdotal too?

What will it take before you all recognize the value of the SROs? We need them back, and sooner rather than later.

Can the SRO run away from the active shooter at parkland?

That's one situation. You can find many more where they saved lives.

[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).

Seriously? To have evidence you would accept, you'd need to have a kid post on SM and then blow up the school! That is nuts!

And the Einstein kid who mentioned the assault rifle they found in the students car? Is that anecdotal too?

What will it take before you all recognize the value of the SROs? We need them back, and sooner rather than later.

Can the SRO run away from the active shooter at parkland?

In almost every case they proved themselves useless. Further, just look at the most recent incidents at MCPS. Although there were no SROs, they were handled as well as could be expected. SROs make no differ nce. It's just a way to throw away tax dollars and make right wingers who hate public education happy by treating those who can't afford private as inmates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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).

Seriously? To have evidence you would accept, you'd need to have a kid post on SM and then blow up the school! That is nuts!

And the Einstein kid who mentioned the assault rifle they found in the students car? Is that anecdotal too?

What will it take before you all recognize the value of the SROs? We need them back, and sooner rather than later.

Can the SRO run away from the active shooter at parkland?

In almost every case they proved themselves useless. Further, just look at the most recent incidents at MCPS. Although there were no SROs, they were handled as well as could be expected. SROs make no differ nce. It's just a way to throw away tax dollars and make right wingers who hate public education happy by treating those who can't afford private as inmates.

Read the news. Another school shooting.

[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:

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.

You stated that violence is up because of the removal of SROs and RJ, which is not true. It's a fox news, Q propaganda, plain and simple

[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:

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.

You stated that violence is up because of the removal of SROs and RJ, which is not true. It's a fox news, Q propaganda, plain and simple

They're also likely the person who has been hyping every incident at each school to make this point when the reality is this stuff happens every year, and the remarkable thing is they've handled each incident just fine without an SRO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

In almost every case they proved themselves useless. Further, just look at the most recent incidents at MCPS. Although there were no SROs, they were handled as well as could be expected. SROs make no differ nce. It's just a way to throw away tax dollars and make right wingers who hate public education happy by treating those who can't afford private as inmates.

Read the news. Another school shooting.

There was an SRO at the school. "On Tuesday, according to a law enforcement official, that deputy and a responding deputy disarmed and arrested a 15-year-old student who is accused of killing three fellow students and wounding eight others, including a teacher." Now I suppose you're going to say, "Thank goodness there was an SRO, so that only 3 people were killed and 8 people were wounded!" But I think the whole idea should be to PREVENT school shootings, so that 0 people are killed and 0 people are wounded. And unfortunately, having an SRO at the school did not do that.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/11/30/oxford-high-shooting-police-school-liaison-officer/8813723002/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

In almost every case they proved themselves useless. Further, just look at the most recent incidents at MCPS. Although there were no SROs, they were handled as well as could be expected. SROs make no differ nce. It's just a way to throw away tax dollars and make right wingers who hate public education happy by treating those who can't afford private as inmates.

Read the news. Another school shooting.

There was an SRO at the school. "On Tuesday, according to a law enforcement official, that deputy and a responding deputy disarmed and arrested a 15-year-old student who is accused of killing three fellow students and wounding eight others, including a teacher." Now I suppose you're going to say, "Thank goodness there was an SRO, so that only 3 people were killed and 8 people were wounded!" But I think the whole idea should be to PREVENT school shootings, so that 0 people are killed and 0 people are wounded. And unfortunately, having an SRO at the school did not do that.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/11/30/oxford-high-shooting-police-school-liaison-officer/8813723002/

Really PP? Can you seriously deny that the SRO, who prevented more students from being killed when he helped to disarm the shooter, played a critical role yesterday? Give me a break. You can move the goal posts all you want, but no one is saying that the only reason to have an SRO to prevent school shootings altogether. But you know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

In almost every case they proved themselves useless. Further, just look at the most recent incidents at MCPS. Although there were no SROs, they were handled as well as could be expected. SROs make no differ nce. It's just a way to throw away tax dollars and make right wingers who hate public education happy by treating those who can't afford private as inmates.

Read the news. Another school shooting.

There was an SRO at the school. "On Tuesday, according to a law enforcement official, that deputy and a responding deputy disarmed and arrested a 15-year-old student who is accused of killing three fellow students and wounding eight others, including a teacher." Now I suppose you're going to say, "Thank goodness there was an SRO, so that only 3 people were killed and 8 people were wounded!" But I think the whole idea should be to PREVENT school shootings, so that 0 people are killed and 0 people are wounded. And unfortunately, having an SRO at the school did not do that.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/11/30/oxford-high-shooting-police-school-liaison-officer/8813723002/

Really PP? Can you seriously deny that the SRO, who prevented more students from being killed when he helped to disarm the shooter, played a critical role yesterday? Give me a break. You can move the goal posts all you want, but no one is saying that the only reason to have an SRO to prevent school shootings altogether. But you know that.

Well, that's the problem with anecdotes, isn't it? We can't replay the event, except without an SRO in the building, to see how things would have turned out.

[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:

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.

You stated that violence is up because of the removal of SROs and RJ, which is not true. It's a fox news, Q propaganda, plain and simple

The paid astroturfer is trying to gin up support for their right-wing candidates again.