Reinstate School Resource Officers at MCPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think SROs are bad for students, please watch this video of the SRO at Quince Orchard a few years ago and the impact he had in the community. Even Craig Rice, council member knew the importance of SROs.
https://youtu.be/u-Bi8r2q4qw

That is 1 SRO who does not represent the all SROs.

Post the video of the cops berating a 5 year old. Cops should not be with kids.

Why? Those weren't SROS. Why can't you stick to the topic at hand?

The topic is cops in the school, they don't belong there. You can post 1 good cop that knew he was being recorded at the time. How about cops have to turn on their video as soon as they walk in the school and you can see every interaction... they won't do it thought. Why not, because they treat some kids 1 way and other another. Blair HS did a non-scientific study and sent kids down the hall without a note... white kids never were even approached, black kids got detention. But it was all a set up.

Why even call a cop for behavior that is insane, cops should not deal with behavior, they should deal with crime.

Can you provide a link to the Blair study? Because my understanding is that it is the security officers (mcps employee, not MCPD) who are responsible for disciplining kids in the hallway without permission. (I think teachers can do this also.). I don’t think that’s generally what the SRO is doing. So you’re pointing out issues of racism or implicit bias in the McPS labor pool, but not an issue that relates specifically to cops.

+1. Does the “non-scientific study” specifically state it was a school SRO, or was this MCPS staff? Either way, all that study shows is that one particular person is discriminating. You simply can’t take those results and project them on an entire community or profession. Once again, the anti-SRO argument assumes all SROs have bad intentions and its claims are wide-sweeping, with no true evidence or data to back them up.

Yes, it's almost as if the anti-SRO crowd is doing the same thing that racists are guilty of doing by being prejudiced towards all SROs because of experiences they've seen with some cops. What's even worse is that challenging them on this idea is considered racist.

The anti-SRO crowd just know it doesn’t work. Just like 3 strikes you are out or mandatory minimums. They sound good but after years of research it.does.not.work.

This article links actual scientific studies.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21299743/police-schools-research

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think SROs are bad for students, please watch this video of the SRO at Quince Orchard a few years ago and the impact he had in the community. Even Craig Rice, council member knew the importance of SROs.
https://youtu.be/u-Bi8r2q4qw

That is 1 SRO who does not represent the all SROs.

Post the video of the cops berating a 5 year old. Cops should not be with kids.

Why? Those weren't SROS. Why can't you stick to the topic at hand?

The topic is cops in the school, they don't belong there. You can post 1 good cop that knew he was being recorded at the time. How about cops have to turn on their video as soon as they walk in the school and you can see every interaction... they won't do it thought. Why not, because they treat some kids 1 way and other another. Blair HS did a non-scientific study and sent kids down the hall without a note... white kids never were even approached, black kids got detention. But it was all a set up.

Why even call a cop for behavior that is insane, cops should not deal with behavior, they should deal with crime.

Can you provide a link to the Blair study? Because my understanding is that it is the security officers (mcps employee, not MCPD) who are responsible for disciplining kids in the hallway without permission. (I think teachers can do this also.). I don’t think that’s generally what the SRO is doing. So you’re pointing out issues of racism or implicit bias in the McPS labor pool, but not an issue that relates specifically to cops.

+1. Does the “non-scientific study” specifically state it was a school SRO, or was this MCPS staff? Either way, all that study shows is that one particular person is discriminating. You simply can’t take those results and project them on an entire community or profession. Once again, the anti-SRO argument assumes all SROs have bad intentions and its claims are wide-sweeping, with no true evidence or data to back them up.

Yes, it's almost as if the anti-SRO crowd is doing the same thing that racists are guilty of doing by being prejudiced towards all SROs because of experiences they've seen with some cops. What's even worse is that challenging them on this idea is considered racist.

The anti-SRO crowd just know it doesn’t work. Just like 3 strikes you are out or mandatory minimums. They sound good but after years of research it.does.not.work.

This article links actual scientific studies.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21299743/police-schools-research

These studies have mixed results. And even the article says there is no proof that officers in schools cause more problems - is it just because those schools with police presence have more problem kids? We just don’t know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think SROs are bad for students, please watch this video of the SRO at Quince Orchard a few years ago and the impact he had in the community. Even Craig Rice, council member knew the importance of SROs.
https://youtu.be/u-Bi8r2q4qw

That is 1 SRO who does not represent the all SROs.

Post the video of the cops berating a 5 year old. Cops should not be with kids.

Why? Those weren't SROS. Why can't you stick to the topic at hand?

The topic is cops in the school, they don't belong there. You can post 1 good cop that knew he was being recorded at the time. How about cops have to turn on their video as soon as they walk in the school and you can see every interaction... they won't do it thought. Why not, because they treat some kids 1 way and other another. Blair HS did a non-scientific study and sent kids down the hall without a note... white kids never were even approached, black kids got detention. But it was all a set up.

Why even call a cop for behavior that is insane, cops should not deal with behavior, they should deal with crime.

Can you provide a link to the Blair study? Because my understanding is that it is the security officers (mcps employee, not MCPD) who are responsible for disciplining kids in the hallway without permission. (I think teachers can do this also.). I don’t think that’s generally what the SRO is doing. So you’re pointing out issues of racism or implicit bias in the McPS labor pool, but not an issue that relates specifically to cops.

+1. Does the “non-scientific study” specifically state it was a school SRO, or was this MCPS staff? Either way, all that study shows is that one particular person is discriminating. You simply can’t take those results and project them on an entire community or profession. Once again, the anti-SRO argument assumes all SROs have bad intentions and its claims are wide-sweeping, with no true evidence or data to back them up.

Yes, it's almost as if the anti-SRO crowd is doing the same thing that racists are guilty of doing by being prejudiced towards all SROs because of experiences they've seen with some cops. What's even worse is that challenging them on this idea is considered racist.

The anti-SRO crowd just know it doesn’t work. Just like 3 strikes you are out or mandatory minimums. They sound good but after years of research it.does.not.work.

This article links actual scientific studies.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21299743/police-schools-research

These studies have mixed results. And even the article says there is no proof that officers in schools cause more problems - is it just because those schools with police presence have more problem kids? We just don’t know.

OMG! Somebody on DCUM posted the fact not just an article that shows one point of view. Call the presses! Report the post! Give them an award.

Of course you only pointed out the side that support your point of view.... typical.

[Anonymous]

I posted a million pages ago that I’d love to see an anonymous survey of HS teachers and counselors. We all can debate forever based on the one or two SROs we’ve met, and the national data maybe says something but isn’t attuned to our local PD which is more diverse and better trained than national average—-the professionals working in the schools are best situated to know if these SROs are helpful or harmful. I trust the teachers and counselors in this. The principals also carry a lot of weight with me, but the teachers and counselors would carry even more.
I don’t want a public MCEA vote — I want a confidential poll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I posted a million pages ago that I’d love to see an anonymous survey of HS teachers and counselors. We all can debate forever based on the one or two SROs we’ve met, and the national data maybe says something but isn’t attuned to our local PD which is more diverse and better trained than national average—-the professionals working in the schools are best situated to know if these SROs are helpful or harmful. I trust the teachers and counselors in this. The principals also carry a lot of weight with me, but the teachers and counselors would carry even more.
I don’t want a public MCEA vote — I want a confidential poll.

well, judging by PG County schools, many wanted to keep some.

[Anonymous]

Many school staff want SROs - it takes the responsibility away from them for any trouble that happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many school staff want SROs - it takes the responsibility away from them for any trouble that happens.

Teacher here. I want SROs because they provide an additional layer of safety and security to our school building. I take care of discipline in my classroom. That’s part of my job. They come in when their training is necessary, like when a student brought a huge knife into my classroom. I am NOT equipped for that, nor should I have to be. No amount of restorative justice was going to wish that knife away, either. You suggest I want SROs because I am lazy. No, I want SROs because I care about my community and I know that they have special training I do not have. If you haven’t been in a school lately, you likely aren’t aware of the very real challenges we face every day. When the council removed the SROs, they took away a valuable member of each community. Our SRO made an effort to know kids. He was a positive influence and our students reacted very well to him. Like the poster above, I would love to see the county send out an anonymous survey to students and teachers. I am confident there is a lot of support for the program. A lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think SROs are bad for students, please watch this video of the SRO at Quince Orchard a few years ago and the impact he had in the community. Even Craig Rice, council member knew the importance of SROs.
https://youtu.be/u-Bi8r2q4qw

That is 1 SRO who does not represent the all SROs.

Post the video of the cops berating a 5 year old. Cops should not be with kids.

Why? Those weren't SROS. Why can't you stick to the topic at hand?

The topic is cops in the school, they don't belong there. You can post 1 good cop that knew he was being recorded at the time. How about cops have to turn on their video as soon as they walk in the school and you can see every interaction... they won't do it thought. Why not, because they treat some kids 1 way and other another. Blair HS did a non-scientific study and sent kids down the hall without a note... white kids never were even approached, black kids got detention. But it was all a set up.

Why even call a cop for behavior that is insane, cops should not deal with behavior, they should deal with crime.

Can you provide a link to the Blair study? Because my understanding is that it is the security officers (mcps employee, not MCPD) who are responsible for disciplining kids in the hallway without permission. (I think teachers can do this also.). I don’t think that’s generally what the SRO is doing. So you’re pointing out issues of racism or implicit bias in the McPS labor pool, but not an issue that relates specifically to cops.

+1. Does the “non-scientific study” specifically state it was a school SRO, or was this MCPS staff? Either way, all that study shows is that one particular person is discriminating. You simply can’t take those results and project them on an entire community or profession. Once again, the anti-SRO argument assumes all SROs have bad intentions and its claims are wide-sweeping, with no true evidence or data to back them up.

Yes, it's almost as if the anti-SRO crowd is doing the same thing that racists are guilty of doing by being prejudiced towards all SROs because of experiences they've seen with some cops. What's even worse is that challenging them on this idea is considered racist.

The anti-SRO crowd just know it doesn’t work. Just like 3 strikes you are out or mandatory minimums. They sound good but after years of research it.does.not.work.

This article links actual scientific studies.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21299743/police-schools-research

Just wondering what you're smoking if that's what you came away with from that article.

The opener: We want to be able to have a school system where students are greeted with school nurses, with full-time mental health supports,”

Our school doesn't even have a fulltime nurse. She travels between schools. How is she going to greet students? Full time mental health supports? Despite having an iep and another with a 504, neither of my children have ever received any mental health support at school. Even when I told them one was suicidal. Now they're expecting a full time mental health staff for 2200 kids?

What if the parents are like the parents of The Magruder Shooter and like to curse and wave their middle finger around rather than accept help for s child in trouble? Wouldn't it be a violation of civil liberties to force their. Hildreth into mental health counseling?

I can tell you from experience that the only proven therapy for most mental health problems is medication. Are you going to force kids to take medication to go to school? You aren't.

Magruder had a full time. Very competent nurse. It didn't stop the shooter.

Gmafb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think SROs are bad for students, please watch this video of the SRO at Quince Orchard a few years ago and the impact he had in the community. Even Craig Rice, council member knew the importance of SROs.
https://youtu.be/u-Bi8r2q4qw

That is 1 SRO who does not represent the all SROs.

Post the video of the cops berating a 5 year old. Cops should not be with kids.

Why? Those weren't SROS. Why can't you stick to the topic at hand?

The topic is cops in the school, they don't belong there. You can post 1 good cop that knew he was being recorded at the time. How about cops have to turn on their video as soon as they walk in the school and you can see every interaction... they won't do it thought. Why not, because they treat some kids 1 way and other another. Blair HS did a non-scientific study and sent kids down the hall without a note... white kids never were even approached, black kids got detention. But it was all a set up.

Why even call a cop for behavior that is insane, cops should not deal with behavior, they should deal with crime.

Can you provide a link to the Blair study? Because my understanding is that it is the security officers (mcps employee, not MCPD) who are responsible for disciplining kids in the hallway without permission. (I think teachers can do this also.). I don’t think that’s generally what the SRO is doing. So you’re pointing out issues of racism or implicit bias in the McPS labor pool, but not an issue that relates specifically to cops.

+1. Does the “non-scientific study” specifically state it was a school SRO, or was this MCPS staff? Either way, all that study shows is that one particular person is discriminating. You simply can’t take those results and project them on an entire community or profession. Once again, the anti-SRO argument assumes all SROs have bad intentions and its claims are wide-sweeping, with no true evidence or data to back them up.

Yes, it's almost as if the anti-SRO crowd is doing the same thing that racists are guilty of doing by being prejudiced towards all SROs because of experiences they've seen with some cops. What's even worse is that challenging them on this idea is considered racist.

The anti-SRO crowd just know it doesn’t work. Just like 3 strikes you are out or mandatory minimums. They sound good but after years of research it.does.not.work.

This article links actual scientific studies.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21299743/police-schools-research

3 chances is more than reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think SROs are bad for students, please watch this video of the SRO at Quince Orchard a few years ago and the impact he had in the community. Even Craig Rice, council member knew the importance of SROs.
https://youtu.be/u-Bi8r2q4qw

That is 1 SRO who does not represent the all SROs.

Post the video of the cops berating a 5 year old. Cops should not be with kids.

Why? Those weren't SROS. Why can't you stick to the topic at hand?

The topic is cops in the school, they don't belong there. You can post 1 good cop that knew he was being recorded at the time. How about cops have to turn on their video as soon as they walk in the school and you can see every interaction... they won't do it thought. Why not, because they treat some kids 1 way and other another. Blair HS did a non-scientific study and sent kids down the hall without a note... white kids never were even approached, black kids got detention. But it was all a set up.

Why even call a cop for behavior that is insane, cops should not deal with behavior, they should deal with crime.

Can you provide a link to the Blair study? Because my understanding is that it is the security officers (mcps employee, not MCPD) who are responsible for disciplining kids in the hallway without permission. (I think teachers can do this also.). I don’t think that’s generally what the SRO is doing. So you’re pointing out issues of racism or implicit bias in the McPS labor pool, but not an issue that relates specifically to cops.

+1. Does the “non-scientific study” specifically state it was a school SRO, or was this MCPS staff? Either way, all that study shows is that one particular person is discriminating. You simply can’t take those results and project them on an entire community or profession. Once again, the anti-SRO argument assumes all SROs have bad intentions and its claims are wide-sweeping, with no true evidence or data to back them up.

Yes, it's almost as if the anti-SRO crowd is doing the same thing that racists are guilty of doing by being prejudiced towards all SROs because of experiences they've seen with some cops. What's even worse is that challenging them on this idea is considered racist.

The anti-SRO crowd just know it doesn’t work. Just like 3 strikes you are out or mandatory minimums. They sound good but after years of research it.does.not.work.

This article links actual scientific studies.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21299743/police-schools-research

3 chances is more than reasonable.

Gmail.

3 strikes doesn't work for whom? For the criminals? Okay. I'm okay with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think SROs are bad for students, please watch this video of the SRO at Quince Orchard a few years ago and the impact he had in the community. Even Craig Rice, council member knew the importance of SROs.
https://youtu.be/u-Bi8r2q4qw

That is 1 SRO who does not represent the all SROs.

Post the video of the cops berating a 5 year old. Cops should not be with kids.

Why? Those weren't SROS. Why can't you stick to the topic at hand?

The topic is cops in the school, they don't belong there. You can post 1 good cop that knew he was being recorded at the time. How about cops have to turn on their video as soon as they walk in the school and you can see every interaction... they won't do it thought. Why not, because they treat some kids 1 way and other another. Blair HS did a non-scientific study and sent kids down the hall without a note... white kids never were even approached, black kids got detention. But it was all a set up.

Why even call a cop for behavior that is insane, cops should not deal with behavior, they should deal with crime.

Can you provide a link to the Blair study? Because my understanding is that it is the security officers (mcps employee, not MCPD) who are responsible for disciplining kids in the hallway without permission. (I think teachers can do this also.). I don’t think that’s generally what the SRO is doing. So you’re pointing out issues of racism or implicit bias in the McPS labor pool, but not an issue that relates specifically to cops.

+1. Does the “non-scientific study” specifically state it was a school SRO, or was this MCPS staff? Either way, all that study shows is that one particular person is discriminating. You simply can’t take those results and project them on an entire community or profession. Once again, the anti-SRO argument assumes all SROs have bad intentions and its claims are wide-sweeping, with no true evidence or data to back them up.

Yes, it's almost as if the anti-SRO crowd is doing the same thing that racists are guilty of doing by being prejudiced towards all SROs because of experiences they've seen with some cops. What's even worse is that challenging them on this idea is considered racist.

The anti-SRO crowd just know it doesn’t work. Just like 3 strikes you are out or mandatory minimums. They sound good but after years of research it.does.not.work.

This article links actual scientific studies.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21299743/police-schools-research

Knowing “it doesn’t work” is not sufficient. These decisions have to based on more than a hunch or a feeling. I read your article. I clicked on all the links and looked at the studies they article cited. The studies you linked do NOT fully support the idea SROs don’t work. They actually reference many good points. The other problem is that article casts a vast nation-wide net. What about the data for MoCo? We have some. It has been posted earlier in this thread: the unanimous principal support, the total of NINE SRO-initiated arrests county-wide. The data we don’t have… likely because it won’t support the council’s desires… is what the full community wants. We know that PGCPS parents and students voted to keep SROs by a very wide margin. We know that regional data presents a compelling argument for reinstating them. Lastly, we fail to acknowledge that there is value in promoting positive interactions between students and police. I do not understand why we vilify police and then tell people to fear them. The SROs provide an opportunity for positive interactions. Those happen daily in schools with SROs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many school staff want SROs - it takes the responsibility away from them for any trouble that happens.

Teacher here. I want SROs because they provide an additional layer of safety and security to our school building. I take care of discipline in my classroom. That’s part of my job. They come in when their training is necessary, like when a student brought a huge knife into my classroom. I am NOT equipped for that, nor should I have to be. No amount of restorative justice was going to wish that knife away, either. You suggest I want SROs because I am lazy. No, I want SROs because I care about my community and I know that they have special training I do not have. If you haven’t been in a school lately, you likely aren’t aware of the very real challenges we face every day. When the council removed the SROs, they took away a valuable member of each community. Our SRO made an effort to know kids. He was a positive influence and our students reacted very well to him. Like the poster above, I would love to see the county send out an anonymous survey to students and teachers. I am confident there is a lot of support for the program. A lot.

Agreed. We are a really smart county. We can craft a program that provides the violence prevention benefits of having an SRO present with an accountability system that ensures they are not used for discipline. Our kids deserve safety. Our teachers deserve safety. Wasn't a female teacher assaulted pretty badly over QO a month or so ago?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me the SRO question comes down to accountability - police have none.

So, if you tell me I have to put my children in the room with someone who might be great or might be a monster, but if they ARE a monster, there is zero way to hold them accountable? I'm going to choose no thank you.

Reform the police, create some accountability for bad cops, change the culture of covering up for bad police and then we can talk about putting them back in schools.

When a police officer violates a department policy, they are subject to internal affairs review. If internal affairs determines that the officer violated policy, they face a variety of punishments. As of right now, internal affairs reviews are not published, but that will be changing soon. I wouldn't be surprised if we all find out that penalties happen more often than we think. It is 100% a misconception that police face no penalties. It is NOT true that there is "zero way to hold them accountable." The civil and criminal court systems still apply to police officers.

Also, I've heard the "covering up for bad police" argument many times over the past couple of years. MCPD has over 1,000 officers. They all serve on shifts (18-20ish officers, but they are currently understaffed). Logically and by the numbers, they can't all work with other bad cops... unless you are attempting to argue that there are so many bad cops that one exists on each shift. I doubt you'd be able to support that with anything other than prejudice. I think if you talked to officers, you'd find they are just as sickened by the bad cops as you are. How do I know? I know many officers.

Internal affairs is utterly toothless. And so long as police can hide behind "qualified immunity", they'll get off scot-free.

What's your source? How do you know internal affairs is "utterly toothless"? Do you have examples of MCPD officers getting off "scot-free"? Since internal affairs cases are currently private, I think you'll have a hard time saying they got off "scot-free" since you don't know what penalties police officers face.

They don't. MCPD has good policy in place for most police interactions, and the internal affairs division will hold police accountable. The problem is what is actually a violation and what the public THINK is a violation are two different things. They think the Finan Berhe shooting was illegal, for example, when Supreme Court decisions say otherwise. Their beef should be with the law of the land, not the officers themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who think SROs are bad for students, please watch this video of the SRO at Quince Orchard a few years ago and the impact he had in the community. Even Craig Rice, council member knew the importance of SROs.
https://youtu.be/u-Bi8r2q4qw

That is 1 SRO who does not represent the all SROs.

Post the video of the cops berating a 5 year old. Cops should not be with kids.

Why? Those weren't SROS. Why can't you stick to the topic at hand?

The topic is cops in the school, they don't belong there. You can post 1 good cop that knew he was being recorded at the time. How about cops have to turn on their video as soon as they walk in the school and you can see every interaction... they won't do it thought. Why not, because they treat some kids 1 way and other another. Blair HS did a non-scientific study and sent kids down the hall without a note... white kids never were even approached, black kids got detention. But it was all a set up.

Why even call a cop for behavior that is insane, cops should not deal with behavior, they should deal with crime.

Can you provide a link to the Blair study? Because my understanding is that it is the security officers (mcps employee, not MCPD) who are responsible for disciplining kids in the hallway without permission. (I think teachers can do this also.). I don’t think that’s generally what the SRO is doing. So you’re pointing out issues of racism or implicit bias in the McPS labor pool, but not an issue that relates specifically to cops.

+1. Does the “non-scientific study” specifically state it was a school SRO, or was this MCPS staff? Either way, all that study shows is that one particular person is discriminating. You simply can’t take those results and project them on an entire community or profession. Once again, the anti-SRO argument assumes all SROs have bad intentions and its claims are wide-sweeping, with no true evidence or data to back them up.

Yes, it's almost as if the anti-SRO crowd is doing the same thing that racists are guilty of doing by being prejudiced towards all SROs because of experiences they've seen with some cops. What's even worse is that challenging them on this idea is considered racist.

The anti-SRO crowd just know it doesn’t work. Just like 3 strikes you are out or mandatory minimums. They sound good but after years of research it.does.not.work.

This article links actual scientific studies.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/platform/amp/2020/6/23/21299743/police-schools-research

3 chances is more than reasonable.

Gmail.

3 strikes doesn't work for whom? For the criminals? Okay. I'm okay with that.

It increases the crime rate… you’re good with that. Wow! Even Polly Klauses dad who created the law spent years getting rid of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me the SRO question comes down to accountability - police have none.

So, if you tell me I have to put my children in the room with someone who might be great or might be a monster, but if they ARE a monster, there is zero way to hold them accountable? I'm going to choose no thank you.

Reform the police, create some accountability for bad cops, change the culture of covering up for bad police and then we can talk about putting them back in schools.

When a police officer violates a department policy, they are subject to internal affairs review. If internal affairs determines that the officer violated policy, they face a variety of punishments. As of right now, internal affairs reviews are not published, but that will be changing soon. I wouldn't be surprised if we all find out that penalties happen more often than we think. It is 100% a misconception that police face no penalties. It is NOT true that there is "zero way to hold them accountable." The civil and criminal court systems still apply to police officers.

Also, I've heard the "covering up for bad police" argument many times over the past couple of years. MCPD has over 1,000 officers. They all serve on shifts (18-20ish officers, but they are currently understaffed). Logically and by the numbers, they can't all work with other bad cops... unless you are attempting to argue that there are so many bad cops that one exists on each shift. I doubt you'd be able to support that with anything other than prejudice. I think if you talked to officers, you'd find they are just as sickened by the bad cops as you are. How do I know? I know many officers.

Internal affairs is utterly toothless. And so long as police can hide behind "qualified immunity", they'll get off scot-free.

What's your source? How do you know internal affairs is "utterly toothless"? Do you have examples of MCPD officers getting off "scot-free"? Since internal affairs cases are currently private, I think you'll have a hard time saying they got off "scot-free" since you don't know what penalties police officers face.

They don't. MCPD has good policy in place for most police interactions, and the internal affairs division will hold police accountable. The problem is what is actually a violation and what the public THINK is a violation are two different things. They think the Finan Berhe shooting was illegal, for example, when Supreme Court decisions say otherwise. Their beef should be with the law of the land, not the officers themselves.

This is not true that MCPD has a good policy. Training officer show recruits his to beat people and not get caught. When they assaulted the person near Leisure World “good” cops stood and watched, nobody reported it. Went to trial and the cop was convicted due to video. Good cops know that if the narc on the bad cops they don’t get backup on their calls. So even good cops cover up bad behavior.