Petition to bring back SROs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

It’s a moot point.

MCPS has SROs they just call them CEOs.

They are no longer allowed to or encouraged to harass kids or discipline them.

They can only handle crimes.

Staff will have a direct connection to them instead of 911. (This has not been implemented yet)

[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:Statistically, SROs rarely of any benefit. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs present and that didn't help matters.

Most experts believe they actually make things worse, and their presence escalates or increases the death toll

So there were SROs at both the Parkland and Uvalde school massacres and they did nothing?

I'm curious about this too.

Since SROs aren't of any help in a school shooting what good are they exactly? Also, with all the police incidents like the recent one with Tyre Nichols is this really a good idea?

dp.. security guards didn't stop the shootings, either. Should they be removed, too?

Some cops are terrible, that doesn't mean all cops are. A lot of the troublemaker kids in school are URM. Does that make all URM kids bad? Should we kick them all out?

Security guards have not show to contribute to the negative affects on students. Except the ones on PG with arrest powers do they got rid of them.

Kids who are violent and do drugs do have negative effects on kids. Why don't we kick them out?

Also, someone keeps posting about the security guard who had sex with a student on campus.. seems like we should kick them all out just in case they all have sex with the kids on campus.

Well, if they're assaulting others or using controlled substances this isn't an MCPS matter, but a police matter and there are places for people who break these laws.

Yes, an SRO in the school would help with this situation.

Police will respond more quickly when a cop calls more so than when a security guard or school admin calls.

You realize there are still SROs called CEOs and they are on school grounds.

Unlike SROs, the CEOs aren't permanently stationed in a particular school. They rotate, and don't interact at all with students. Some of the SROs would engage with the students to create bonds and become mentors. There are some bad SROs, as there are some bad teachers, clergy, etc.. But don't make sweeping generalizations about a group because you wouldn't like it if people did that to certain other groups.

You made a sweeping generalization that they built relationships.

CEOs are in school, they are sworn officers, they can still create relationships with students. They just are not allowed to discipline students.

My kids at Kennedy say they've never seen the CEO at their school. So I wouldn't say it's universally true or consistent, as tends to be the case with all things MCPS.

It's very clear that CEOs, unlike SROs, are a "there if you need us" but meant to be invisible and outside of the school. Whereas the old SRO model was about a visible, consistent presence.

That's the problem. No one sees them and no one knows of them.

That only for 2021-2022 school year. That was changed Fall 2022.

Again, if that change was made, it's not being universally executed at all MCPS high schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

However, there sure are a lot of stories about school shootings where SROs did not make any real difference like both Parkland and Uvalde.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

It’s a moot point.

MCPS has SROs they just call them CEOs.

They are no longer allowed to or encouraged to harass kids or discipline them.

They can only handle crimes.

Staff will have a direct connection to them instead of 911. (This has not been implemented yet)

Do they have CFOs and COOs too?

[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:Statistically, SROs rarely of any benefit. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs present and that didn't help matters.

Most experts believe they actually make things worse, and their presence escalates or increases the death toll

So there were SROs at both the Parkland and Uvalde school massacres and they did nothing?

I'm curious about this too.

Since SROs aren't of any help in a school shooting what good are they exactly? Also, with all the police incidents like the recent one with Tyre Nichols is this really a good idea?

dp.. security guards didn't stop the shootings, either. Should they be removed, too?

Some cops are terrible, that doesn't mean all cops are. A lot of the troublemaker kids in school are URM. Does that make all URM kids bad? Should we kick them all out?

Security guards have not show to contribute to the negative affects on students. Except the ones on PG with arrest powers do they got rid of them.

Kids who are violent and do drugs do have negative effects on kids. Why don't we kick them out?

Also, someone keeps posting about the security guard who had sex with a student on campus.. seems like we should kick them all out just in case they all have sex with the kids on campus.

Well, if they're assaulting others or using controlled substances this isn't an MCPS matter, but a police matter and there are places for people who break these laws.

Yes, an SRO in the school would help with this situation.

Police will respond more quickly when a cop calls more so than when a security guard or school admin calls.

You realize there are still SROs called CEOs and they are on school grounds.

Unlike SROs, the CEOs aren't permanently stationed in a particular school. They rotate, and don't interact at all with students. Some of the SROs would engage with the students to create bonds and become mentors. There are some bad SROs, as there are some bad teachers, clergy, etc.. But don't make sweeping generalizations about a group because you wouldn't like it if people did that to certain other groups.

You made a sweeping generalization that they built relationships.

CEOs are in school, they are sworn officers, they can still create relationships with students. They just are not allowed to discipline students.

My kids at Kennedy say they've never seen the CEO at their school. So I wouldn't say it's universally true or consistent, as tends to be the case with all things MCPS.

It's very clear that CEOs, unlike SROs, are a "there if you need us" but meant to be invisible and outside of the school. Whereas the old SRO model was about a visible, consistent presence.

That's the problem. No one sees them and no one knows of them.

That only for 2021-2022 school year. That was changed Fall 2022.

Again, if that change was made, it's not being universally executed at all MCPS high schools.

Yes it has except the direct phone calls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

It’s a moot point.

MCPS has SROs they just call them CEOs.

They are no longer allowed to or encouraged to harass kids or discipline them.

They can only handle crimes.

Staff will have a direct connection to them instead of 911. (This has not been implemented yet)

Do they have CFOs and COOs too?

Just KARENS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

Ok, sigh. Here we go again:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/20/us/maryland-school-shooting-resource-officer-response-trnd/index.html

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/maryland/5-clarksburg-high-students-arrested-after-gun-brought-to-school/65-b7ff209f-24ad-4798-adf7-d7db1161f582

https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/student-arrested-after-bringing-gun-to-clarksburg-high-school-according-to-principal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

Ok, sigh. Here we go again:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/20/us/maryland-school-shooting-resource-officer-response-trnd/index.html

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/maryland/5-clarksburg-high-students-arrested-after-gun-brought-to-school/65-b7ff209f-24ad-4798-adf7-d7db1161f582

https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/student-arrested-after-bringing-gun-to-clarksburg-high-school-according-to-principal

Oh, here we go again

The first one he killed is target the cop shot and missed meaning he could’ve hit kids in the background but luckily he didn’t and the guy shot himself. So no he did not stop that.

The second and 3rd one the student told and administrator, the administrator told the SRO, the STO called the cops. The administrator could’ve easily called the cops.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

Ok, sigh. Here we go again:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/20/us/maryland-school-shooting-resource-officer-response-trnd/index.html

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/maryland/5-clarksburg-high-students-arrested-after-gun-brought-to-school/65-b7ff209f-24ad-4798-adf7-d7db1161f582

https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/student-arrested-after-bringing-gun-to-clarksburg-high-school-according-to-principal

Yes, there were one or two incidents in the past 20 years where they did help but more often than not they didn't or made things worse by escolating the violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Statistically, SROs rarely of any benefit. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs present and that didn't help matters.

Most experts believe they actually make things worse, and their presence escalates or increases the death toll

So there were SROs at both the Parkland and Uvalde school massacres and they did nothing?

I'm curious about this too.

Since SROs aren't of any help in a school shooting what good are they exactly? Also, with all the police incidents like the recent one with Tyre Nichols is this really a good idea?

dp.. security guards didn't stop the shootings, either. Should they be removed, too?

Some cops are terrible, that doesn't mean all cops are. A lot of the troublemaker kids in school are URM. Does that make all URM kids bad? Should we kick them all out?

Security guards have not show to contribute to the negative affects on students. Except the ones on PG with arrest powers do they got rid of them.

Kids who are violent and do drugs do have negative effects on kids. Why don't we kick them out?

Also, someone keeps posting about the security guard who had sex with a student on campus.. seems like we should kick them all out just in case they all have sex with the kids on campus.

Well, if they're assaulting others or using controlled substances this isn't an MCPS matter, but a police matter and there are places for people who break these laws.

Yes, an SRO in the school would help with this situation.

Police will respond more quickly when a cop calls more so than when a security guard or school admin calls.

You realize there are still SROs called CEOs and they are on school grounds.

Unlike SROs, the CEOs aren't permanently stationed in a particular school. They rotate, and don't interact at all with students. Some of the SROs would engage with the students to create bonds and become mentors. There are some bad SROs, as there are some bad teachers, clergy, etc.. But don't make sweeping generalizations about a group because you wouldn't like it if people did that to certain other groups.

You made a sweeping generalization that they built relationships.

CEOs are in school, they are sworn officers, they can still create relationships with students. They just are not allowed to discipline students.

My kids at Kennedy say they've never seen the CEO at their school. So I wouldn't say it's universally true or consistent, as tends to be the case with all things MCPS.

It's very clear that CEOs, unlike SROs, are a "there if you need us" but meant to be invisible and outside of the school. Whereas the old SRO model was about a visible, consistent presence.

+1 CEOs are not allowed to interact with kids unless they are called to by school admin.

Some SROs did indeed foster relationships with the kids.

Someone keeps posting about Uvalde and Parkland, making sweeping generalizations about how ineffective SROs are. But, if someone mentions that SROs have fostered good relationship with kids IN MCPS, then that's just a sweeping generalization, and it shouldn't be used as a reason to bring back SROs.

gtfo with your stupid logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

There are plenty of stories that have been posted before. Google is your friend.

Come up with something real. What is your solution?

2018 an ARMED SRO stopped a shooting in MD:

https://www.police1.com/active-shooter/articles/armed-sro-stopped-md-school-shooting-2-students-shot-BvrrqaXiOdlQlnqq/

March 2022 SRO stopped shooting:

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/school-resource-officer-just-stopped-an-active-shooter/

Another:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/17/us/dixon-school-shooting.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

There are plenty of stories that have been posted before. Google is your friend.

Come up with something real. What is your solution?

2018 an ARMED SRO stopped a shooting in MD:

https://www.police1.com/active-shooter/articles/armed-sro-stopped-md-school-shooting-2-students-shot-BvrrqaXiOdlQlnqq/

March 2022 SRO stopped shooting:

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/school-resource-officer-just-stopped-an-active-shooter/

Another:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/17/us/dixon-school-shooting.html

MCPS have SRO’s they are called CEO’s … relax!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

There are plenty of stories that have been posted before. Google is your friend.

Come up with something real. What is your solution?

2018 an ARMED SRO stopped a shooting in MD:

https://www.police1.com/active-shooter/articles/armed-sro-stopped-md-school-shooting-2-students-shot-BvrrqaXiOdlQlnqq/

March 2022 SRO stopped shooting:

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/school-resource-officer-just-stopped-an-active-shooter/

Another:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/17/us/dixon-school-shooting.html

Do you people even read past the headlines?

All of these show a huge failure on the SRO’s part.

But…, MCPS’s have SRO’s so what more do you want?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG, a majority black county isn't afraid of SROs. They did it right and decided to actually survey residents (instead of a small select group) and made the decision to keep SROs based on resident feedback: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/pgcps-school-board-vote-school-resource-officers/65-551556ee-53c7-4288-acff-255dc8b01b58

A district-wide survey revealed 82% of its 13,000 respondents think SROs are important or very important to maintaining a safe learning environment.

GET 'EM WITH THE RECEIPTS AND THE FACTS!

Montgomery County is the only county in the state of Maryland to do away with SROs by the way.

Sounds like MoCo is the only county looking at actual data then since SROs are notoriously ineffective.

Exactly, since every credible study concludes that they almost never improve matters and more often subject kids to greater risk.

MCPS used data that showed SROs can help reduce violent crime in schools.

Oh no, it was the exact opposite. That's why they got rid of them.

SRO's were removed and crime and violence is up. So, what is your solution to all this? Why should our kids have fear going to school? You do realize one reason why we don't have enough staff/filled positions is because of the issues in school.

Crime is also up in the counties with SRO’s so the SRO’s are not the reason for the rise.

No one is saying that is the reason for the rise, but at least there was another layer IN THE SCHOOLS to keep the students and staff safer. So, what do you propose should happen to make MCPS safe for all students and staff. No SRO's, no discipline, no consequences...you are ok with the free for all? You must not care as you don't have kids in MCPS.

Have you read the new plan?
Have you read the suggestions in this thread.

Do you know PG county fired 100+ security personnel and are hiring counselors?

Cite the source - I mean all you anti SRO keep babbling and have no links like the for-SRO people do.

It’s in the pot -SRO post saying “PG county kept SROs.

Did you even read it? It showed 1/5 arrests were false arrests.

They kept 1 SRO /HS, changed their role and removed security guards that were given arrest record

It’s pretty close to the same as the MCPS CEO program

So are you going to cite your sources or keep babbling?

So what you are saying is that you don’t have or know where to find the SRO program for PG. County or the CEO program for MCPS?

So…. you’re babbling

So you haven’t read them and can’t link them here. Google is not that hard to use. Educate yourself.

My goodness. You literally were the first to bring it upwithout posting sources and then now you're turning it around asking US to post the links. You are a MORON and doesn't deserve to be a part of this conversation.

Agree anyone who thinks putting SROs in school is a good idea needs to educate themselves.

And anyone who assumes all SROs are bad needs stop with the progressive BS and use some critical thinking skills.

Wouldn't it be better for a kid who does not feel comfortable around cops to interact with cops in a safe setting? The charter of SROs can change; you can put guardrails on their duties. But, it's better for kids to be comfortable with the police than see them as the enemy.

If a black boy is getting bullied, threatened, victim of theft. who is he going to turn to?

It's well documented that SROs don't reduce school violence and more often put kids at greater risk. Both Parkland and Uvalde had SROs and it didn't help either place. People suggesting otherwise need to stop pushing this regressive tripe and educate themselves.

No, it isn't well documented. The study on it is not conclusive either way. There are pros and cons. You need to educate yourself.

And you constantly bringing up Uvalde and parkland has zero to do with MCPS. It's like saying a handful of black kids being violent in MCPS means that all black kids are bad. See how that works?

It is. In fact, SROs were present at the majority of school shootings and did nothing or made things worse.

OH geez. Please do not force us to keep providing you with links to multiple news stories of how an SRO has helped prevent shootings or more. We've done this already but there's nothing we can do when you refuse to see the truth.

There is literally not one news story on this thread that shows that an SRO prevented a shooting. Not one.

It’s a moot point.

MCPS has SROs they just call them CEOs.

They are no longer allowed to or encouraged to harass kids or discipline them.

They can only handle crimes.

Staff will have a direct connection to them instead of 911. (This has not been implemented yet)

CEOs are not SROs. SROs were part of the school community. They fostered strong relationships with students and staff. CEOs are restricted to just responding to calls at the school.

Your nonsense about them being “No longer allowed to or encouraged to harass kids or discipline them” is just that: complete nonsense. They were NEVER allowed or encouraged to do either of those, and you flat-out know that. You are doing a huge disservice to the good men and women who have filled that role honorably and successfully. It’s sick, really.

Many, many of us who worked with SROs saw the good they did in the community. We saw how they fostered positive relationships. We’ve now taken that away from our staff and students.