For everyone insisting MCPS reinstate SROs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most cops never fire their gun in their careers against a criminal. The focus on the SRO having a gun is a distraction issue. Properly trained SROs are very valuable in schools. That is why most want them back. The purpose is to deter crime and violence.

Yes SROs are necessary and they don’t need to be cops with guns.

Not sure that's true especially when they run away when their needed most like the one from Parkland.

Cops run away in parkland and Texas.

But regular people ran in.

So yes we need SROs but they should NOT be cops.

This is dumb. It's like saying "some people abuse welfare programs so we should get rid of it", or "more gun laws won't prevent criminals from committing crime so we shouldn't have more gun laws".

No system, program, law is perfect, but we don't get rid of it because of a few bad apples.

Actually the statistics are not in your favor. Most SROs do not stop crime. So conversely, just because 1 SRO in 50,000 did 1 good thing doesn’t mean we should have SROs.

Do you have actual statistics to share? Real ones? I doubt there are 50,000 SROs in the nation, and even if that’s the case, I suspect more than one did a “good thing.”

Yes there are tons of statistics. Did you watch the video? Did you read the thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most cops never fire their gun in their careers against a criminal. The focus on the SRO having a gun is a distraction issue. Properly trained SROs are very valuable in schools. That is why most want them back. The purpose is to deter crime and violence.

Yes SROs are necessary and they don’t need to be cops with guns.

Not sure that's true especially when they run away when their needed most like the one from Parkland.

Cops run away in parkland and Texas.

But regular people ran in.

So yes we need SROs but they should NOT be cops.

This is dumb. It's like saying "some people abuse welfare programs so we should get rid of it", or "more gun laws won't prevent criminals from committing crime so we shouldn't have more gun laws".

No system, program, law is perfect, but we don't get rid of it because of a few bad apples.

Actually the statistics are not in your favor. Most SROs do not stop crime. So conversely, just because 1 SRO in 50,000 did 1 good thing doesn’t mean we should have SROs.

Do you have actual statistics to share? Real ones? I doubt there are 50,000 SROs in the nation, and even if that’s the case, I suspect more than one did a “good thing.”

Yes there are tons of statistics. Did you watch the video? Did you read the thread?

Yes, I have. I haven’t seen anything that supports what you wrote above re: only “1 … in 50,000 did a good thing.” I’m here and willing to listen, but I haven’t seen anything on this long thread yet that tells me why my children shouldn’t have the support of an SRO at school. Conversely, I’ve seen statistics on this thread that confirms my belief that SROs are a benefit to MCPS.

[Anonymous]

I read all 20 pages and I'm really, really amazed by some of the replies. Looks like some folks are brainwashed!
With so much gun violence happening these days (see Uvalde but also recent MCPS events) taking SROs from schools is a crime! We are just waiting for another Uvalde to happen in MCPS and obviously, nobody will be responsible.

Schools are made for education, not for crimes of any sort. There should be no place for guns or drugs in MCPS! 30 years ago, parents were called by the principle if their kids punched each other, now days we should be ok with students selling and buying drugs or carrying guns in schools. Schools are not for education anymore but for political agendas. And still, we are wondering why teacher's turnover is so high, why students learn less and less even if the MCPS budget goes up every single year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read all 20 pages and I'm really, really amazed by some of the replies. Looks like some folks are brainwashed!
With so much gun violence happening these days (see Uvalde but also recent MCPS events) taking SROs from schools is a crime! We are just waiting for another Uvalde to happen in MCPS and obviously, nobody will be responsible.

Schools are made for education, not for crimes of any sort. There should be no place for guns or drugs in MCPS! 30 years ago, parents were called by the principle if their kids punched each other, now days we should be ok with students selling and buying drugs or carrying guns in schools. Schools are not for education anymore but for political agendas. And still, we are wondering why teacher's turnover is so high, why students learn less and less even if the MCPS budget goes up every single year.

An SRO isn't stopping a mass shooting event. They may stop lesser violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An SRO isn't stopping a mass shooting event. They may stop lesser violence.

"A school resource officer is a sworn law-enforcement officer with arrest powers who works, either full or part time, in a school setting. Nearly all SROs are armed (about 91 percent, according to federal data), and most carry other restraints like handcuffs as well." https://www.edweek.org/leadership/school-resource-officer-sro-duties-effectiveness

The chance an officer with a gun to stop a mass shooting event are why higher than no officer at all. Even if the shooter targets the SRO first, that will give time to the rest to prepare/hide. Seconds can make a huge difference.
At my son's school, teachers ignore the "less violence" crimes. They don't hear or see the students committing them. Their role is teaching not policing.

I know there is an agenda in place but the future of our children is at stake here. Please don't lose your commonsense people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An SRO isn't stopping a mass shooting event. They may stop lesser violence.

"A school resource officer is a sworn law-enforcement officer with arrest powers who works, either full or part time, in a school setting. Nearly all SROs are armed (about 91 percent, according to federal data), and most carry other restraints like handcuffs as well." https://www.edweek.org/leadership/school-resource-officer-sro-duties-effectiveness

The chance an officer with a gun to stop a mass shooting event are why higher than no officer at all. Even if the shooter targets the SRO first, that will give time to the rest to prepare/hide. Seconds can make a huge difference.
At my son's school, teachers ignore the "less violence" crimes. They don't hear or see the students committing them. Their role is teaching not policing.

I know there is an agenda in place but the future of our children is at stake here. Please don't lose your commonsense people!

An officer with a pistol isn't stopping an assault rifle. Just not happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read all 20 pages and I'm really, really amazed by some of the replies. Looks like some folks are brainwashed!
With so much gun violence happening these days (see Uvalde but also recent MCPS events) taking SROs from schools is a crime! We are just waiting for another Uvalde to happen in MCPS and obviously, nobody will be responsible.

Schools are made for education, not for crimes of any sort. There should be no place for guns or drugs in MCPS! 30 years ago, parents were called by the principle if their kids punched each other, now days we should be ok with students selling and buying drugs or carrying guns in schools. Schools are not for education anymore but for political agendas. And still, we are wondering why teacher's turnover is so high, why students learn less and less even if the MCPS budget goes up every single year.

An SRO isn't stopping a mass shooting event. They may stop lesser violence.

And they stop tons of "lesser" violence which happens DAILY at our low SES high school. No one wants to talk about this- the reality is the kids that get hurt the most from removing SROs are the kids at the high FARMS high school where crime and violence happen much more often than the wealthy schools. That's the biggest hypocrisy of the BoE and the County Council. They removed the SROs under the false premise that they are a detriment to black and brown kids when the reality is that they were far more helpful by being role models, by helping stop fights, and by deterring crime at the schools where these activities are more prevalent. Even most black parents and kids I know at the school want them back but won't ever publicly admit it in fear of the loud extremist on the left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read all 20 pages and I'm really, really amazed by some of the replies. Looks like some folks are brainwashed!
With so much gun violence happening these days (see Uvalde but also recent MCPS events) taking SROs from schools is a crime! We are just waiting for another Uvalde to happen in MCPS and obviously, nobody will be responsible.

Schools are made for education, not for crimes of any sort. There should be no place for guns or drugs in MCPS! 30 years ago, parents were called by the principle if their kids punched each other, now days we should be ok with students selling and buying drugs or carrying guns in schools. Schools are not for education anymore but for political agendas. And still, we are wondering why teacher's turnover is so high, why students learn less and less even if the MCPS budget goes up every single year.

An SRO isn't stopping a mass shooting event. They may stop lesser violence.

And they stop tons of "lesser" violence which happens DAILY at our low SES high school. No one wants to talk about this- the reality is the kids that get hurt the most from removing SROs are the kids at the high FARMS high school where crime and violence happen much more often than the wealthy schools. That's the biggest hypocrisy of the BoE and the County Council. They removed the SROs under the false premise that they are a detriment to black and brown kids when the reality is that they were far more helpful by being role models, by helping stop fights, and by deterring crime at the schools where these activities are more prevalent. Even most black parents and kids I know at the school want them back but won't ever publicly admit it in fear of the loud extremist on the left.

Oh, right. DCUM's Ganglandia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read all 20 pages and I'm really, really amazed by some of the replies. Looks like some folks are brainwashed!
With so much gun violence happening these days (see Uvalde but also recent MCPS events) taking SROs from schools is a crime! We are just waiting for another Uvalde to happen in MCPS and obviously, nobody will be responsible.

Schools are made for education, not for crimes of any sort. There should be no place for guns or drugs in MCPS! 30 years ago, parents were called by the principle if their kids punched each other, now days we should be ok with students selling and buying drugs or carrying guns in schools. Schools are not for education anymore but for political agendas. And still, we are wondering why teacher's turnover is so high, why students learn less and less even if the MCPS budget goes up every single year.

An SRO isn't stopping a mass shooting event. They may stop lesser violence.

And they stop tons of "lesser" violence which happens DAILY at our low SES high school. No one wants to talk about this- the reality is the kids that get hurt the most from removing SROs are the kids at the high FARMS high school where crime and violence happen much more often than the wealthy schools. That's the biggest hypocrisy of the BoE and the County Council. They removed the SROs under the false premise that they are a detriment to black and brown kids when the reality is that they were far more helpful by being role models, by helping stop fights, and by deterring crime at the schools where these activities are more prevalent. Even most black parents and kids I know at the school want them back but won't ever publicly admit it in fear of the loud extremist on the left.

As usual, these incompetents resolved the problem by hiding it. Crime and violence suddenly disappeared once the SROs are gone. Until the new problem gets soo big and they will be fotced to hire even more SROs than before to show us how much they care of our kids safety.
So sick of these clowns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read all 20 pages and I'm really, really amazed by some of the replies. Looks like some folks are brainwashed!
With so much gun violence happening these days (see Uvalde but also recent MCPS events) taking SROs from schools is a crime! We are just waiting for another Uvalde to happen in MCPS and obviously, nobody will be responsible.

Schools are made for education, not for crimes of any sort. There should be no place for guns or drugs in MCPS! 30 years ago, parents were called by the principle if their kids punched each other, now days we should be ok with students selling and buying drugs or carrying guns in schools. Schools are not for education anymore but for political agendas. And still, we are wondering why teacher's turnover is so high, why students learn less and less even if the MCPS budget goes up every single year.

An SRO isn't stopping a mass shooting event. They may stop lesser violence.

And they stop tons of "lesser" violence which happens DAILY at our low SES high school. No one wants to talk about this- the reality is the kids that get hurt the most from removing SROs are the kids at the high FARMS high school where crime and violence happen much more often than the wealthy schools. That's the biggest hypocrisy of the BoE and the County Council. They removed the SROs under the false premise that they are a detriment to black and brown kids when the reality is that they were far more helpful by being role models, by helping stop fights, and by deterring crime at the schools where these activities are more prevalent. Even most black parents and kids I know at the school want them back but won't ever publicly admit it in fear of the loud extremist on the left.

Oh, right. DCUM's Ganglandia.

LOL ya more imaginary problems for the right to obsess over

[Anonymous]

Show us where a kid doing what they are supposed to be doing got beat up by an SRO, sent to the office, got kicked out of school etc.

Everyone wants you to forget that schools and society have rules and those who don’t pay attention to the rules are now the victims.

[Anonymous]

Principals, teachers and a vast majority of parents wants SROs in schools but few vocals can badly hurt reelection efforts. The flock may complain but presents no risk. Sad ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Show us where a kid doing what they are supposed to be doing got beat up by an SRO, sent to the office, got kicked out of school etc.

Everyone wants you to forget that schools and society have rules and those who don’t pay attention to the rules are now the victims.

This. I completely agree with this sentiment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read all 20 pages and I'm really, really amazed by some of the replies. Looks like some folks are brainwashed!
With so much gun violence happening these days (see Uvalde but also recent MCPS events) taking SROs from schools is a crime! We are just waiting for another Uvalde to happen in MCPS and obviously, nobody will be responsible.

Schools are made for education, not for crimes of any sort. There should be no place for guns or drugs in MCPS! 30 years ago, parents were called by the principle if their kids punched each other, now days we should be ok with students selling and buying drugs or carrying guns in schools. Schools are not for education anymore but for political agendas. And still, we are wondering why teacher's turnover is so high, why students learn less and less even if the MCPS budget goes up every single year.

An SRO isn't stopping a mass shooting event. They may stop lesser violence.

And they stop tons of "lesser" violence which happens DAILY at our low SES high school. No one wants to talk about this- the reality is the kids that get hurt the most from removing SROs are the kids at the high FARMS high school where crime and violence happen much more often than the wealthy schools. That's the biggest hypocrisy of the BoE and the County Council. They removed the SROs under the false premise that they are a detriment to black and brown kids when the reality is that they were far more helpful by being role models, by helping stop fights, and by deterring crime at the schools where these activities are more prevalent. Even most black parents and kids I know at the school want them back but won't ever publicly admit it in fear of the loud extremist on the left.

Oh, right. DCUM's Ganglandia.

LOL ya more imaginary problems for the right to obsess over

Must be nice to live in a bubble where you or your child get to attend schools where these things happen on a rare occasion rather than daily. Do me a favor and let's switch schools. Signed, black mom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Show us where a kid doing what they are supposed to be doing got beat up by an SRO, sent to the office, got kicked out of school etc.

Everyone wants you to forget that schools and society have rules and those who don’t pay attention to the rules are now the victims.

This. I completely agree with this sentiment.

I'm a rule follower and I do believe that without enforcement rules become meaningless, so it's not like I don't get the concept. But we are talking about permanent, life long consequences for actions taken by children, many of whom have brains that haven't matured to the point where they can meaningfully understand consequences. When a child commits a serious offense, I believe it means they have been failed by adults somewhere along the line. Is a bad childhood a reason to escape consequences for your actions as an adult? No. But for an actual child, in the middle of their bad childhood, who is going down a bad road, I am not ok with just tossing them out like yesterday's trash - not even if they did something really bad. I think most people in this conversation are not imagining their own child as the one misbehaving. Taking action to protect other kids from violence - yes. Deciding children are really adults who deserve adult consequences when they do bad things - no.

White children who are hellions as teens are generally given grace by our society/legal system. Many of them grow out of it and go on to live virtuous, productive lives. Black teenagers exhibiting similar behavior are so often judged to be irredeemably bad and are much more likely to face criminal charges for the same actions. Whether a bad behavior is a crime deserving legal consequences very often comes down to who did it. I'm not saying these aren't bad behaviors and to just fondly pat them on the head. I'm saying that while we live in a society that indulges bad behavior from some kids but throws others in jail for the same thing, best to keep law enforcement out of our schools.

Honestly I don't understand how people can say "in my day we faced consequences from our parents and the school when we misbehaved" and somehow translate that to "and therefore the police should be involved in disciplining kids today". I promise that kids today are not some new breed of monster.