For everyone insisting MCPS reinstate SROs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

+1. This is exactly right. I had the pleasure, in a former professional life, of interacting with SROs in DCPS High Schools, and they were nothing like what is being described here. They made the effort to get to know the kids, and when someone from the school was arrested were the 1st to provide helpful information (which often was along the lines of this is a kid with potential with not a lot of support at home). SROs should not be any officer off the street, which is what schools get now when an issue arises, they need to be specially trained with a demonstrated aptitude for interacting with kids. We moved recently, and in our exurban county there are SROs in the schools who are loved and respected parts of the school community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

It appears we found one of our anti-SRO posters. Can you respond to the questions posed above? Who should be responsible for responding to violence (weapons, etc.) if it isn’t an SRO? I’m a teacher. Should I take some form of martial arts or self defense training? Should our counselors be trained in how to disarm students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

[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:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

I would prefer armed police.

[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:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

No that’s not it. My family is full of police and we don’t think armed guards should be in schools. It’s easy to imagine there is some boogie man out there hating on police because the alternate is understand that you are wrong and that does not feel good.

If you realized that there are some educated, thoughtful, police supporting people that know through their work and knowledge of how to secure schools and they know SROs don’t work and are harmful then you’d have to admit you’re just plain wrong and that sucks. So you next best option is to “other” the people you disagree with you to feel good about your stance.

Did you watch the video?

[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:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

Are you saying you need a gun to break up a fight?

Are you saying you need arrest powers for somebody throwing a chair?

The reality is the SRO would not have prevented the fight it wound have happened anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Yes I work with SROs. You only see one side of it, I have 360 degree view.

[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:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

No that’s not it. My family is full of police and we don’t think armed guards should be in schools. It’s easy to imagine there is some boogie man out there hating on police because the alternate is understand that you are wrong and that does not feel good.

If you realized that there are some educated, thoughtful, police supporting people that know through their work and knowledge of how to secure schools and they know SROs don’t work and are harmful then you’d have to admit you’re just plain wrong and that sucks. So you next best option is to “other” the people you disagree with you to feel good about your stance.

Did you watch the video?

Yes, I watched the video. It simply wasn’t convincing. Neither is your statement above. I am very confident in my stance. 20 years in education has shown me time and time again why we need officers in school. I have the realistic, every-day evidence of their need.

What, specifically, is your “work and knowledge of how to secure schools” that you mention above? You claim that through your work you have seen that SROs aren’t the answer. Since this is apparently your area of expertise, can you explain to all of us what you are doing to fix that? I would rather not find another weapon in my classroom.

[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:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

No that’s not it. My family is full of police and we don’t think armed guards should be in schools. It’s easy to imagine there is some boogie man out there hating on police because the alternate is understand that you are wrong and that does not feel good.

If you realized that there are some educated, thoughtful, police supporting people that know through their work and knowledge of how to secure schools and they know SROs don’t work and are harmful then you’d have to admit you’re just plain wrong and that sucks. So you next best option is to “other” the people you disagree with you to feel good about your stance.

Did you watch the video?

Yes, I watched the video. It simply wasn’t convincing. Neither is your statement above. I am very confident in my stance. 20 years in education has shown me time and time again why we need officers in school. I have the realistic, every-day evidence of their need.

What, specifically, is your “work and knowledge of how to secure schools” that you mention above? You claim that through your work you have seen that SROs aren’t the answer. Since this is apparently your area of expertise, can you explain to all of us what you are doing to fix that? I would rather not find another weapon in my classroom.

How many times has an SRO stopped a “weapon” from entering your classroom? Which weapon? The reality is you want to stop “weapons” from entering your classroom, but STOs don’t stop that,


I think what most teachers are worried about are fights.

[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:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

No that’s not it. My family is full of police and we don’t think armed guards should be in schools. It’s easy to imagine there is some boogie man out there hating on police because the alternate is understand that you are wrong and that does not feel good.

If you realized that there are some educated, thoughtful, police supporting people that know through their work and knowledge of how to secure schools and they know SROs don’t work and are harmful then you’d have to admit you’re just plain wrong and that sucks. So you next best option is to “other” the people you disagree with you to feel good about your stance.

Did you watch the video?

Are your family police officers here in this area? I don't know any police who think there should not be SROs. Certainly not in this area. The DMV. And I've worked with police for almost 30 years. They know categorically that having police in schools not only helps prevent beefs in school, but it helps both identify and prevent beefs that get carried out into the community and are often violent. Everyone benefits.