For everyone insisting MCPS reinstate SROs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

THre's so much supposition there that it's kind of meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

THre's so much supposition there that it's kind of meaningless.

If by that you mean the supposition that the 242 paper arrests and unknown number of civil citations all merited involving the criminal justice system, then I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

I read those paragraphs prior to posting the data. My point still stands. 27 arrests in a school system with over 160,000 students does not support the initial claim that “cops are disciplinarians for things that are not crimes.” Even if we look at the paragraph I didn’t mention, the “paper arrests,” you’ll notice they are STILL criminal activities in nature: assaults, thefts, vandalism, etc. We want police in school to assist with crimes. These are crimes. As for the “almost all,” it comes as no surprise to me that in some rare instances a student may end with a criminal record after committing a crime. I suppose you give no credit to the fact that the same report states most students with paper arrests don’t end up with a record? That right there suggests that an SRO’s presence in a school does not automatically lead to tons of juvenile records.

Administrators have other transgressions to deal with: academic dishonesty, tardiness, basic disrespect, technology misuse, etc. Those are disciplinary issues a school can and should handle. The ones above? They should be the domain of an SRO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

I read those paragraphs prior to posting the data. My point still stands. 27 arrests in a school system with over 160,000 students does not support the initial claim that “cops are disciplinarians for things that are not crimes.” Even if we look at the paragraph I didn’t mention, the “paper arrests,” you’ll notice they are STILL criminal activities in nature: assaults, thefts, vandalism, etc. We want police in school to assist with crimes. These are crimes. As for the “almost all,” it comes as no surprise to me that in some rare instances a student may end with a criminal record after committing a crime. I suppose you give no credit to the fact that the same report states most students with paper arrests don’t end up with a record? That right there suggests that an SRO’s presence in a school does not automatically lead to tons of juvenile records.

Administrators have other transgressions to deal with: academic dishonesty, tardiness, basic disrespect, technology misuse, etc. Those are disciplinary issues a school can and should handle. The ones above? They should be the domain of an SRO.

Assaults, thefts, and vandalism are crimes by definition, but no 15 year old should be arrested, on paper or otherwise, for carving their name into a desk, or getting into your average, no deadly weapons involved fistfight, or stealing the stapler from the teacher's desk, but those could all be defined as crimes, if one was so inclined. I'm trying to think of a "mere disciplinary" issue that _couldn't_ be defined as a crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

I read those paragraphs prior to posting the data. My point still stands. 27 arrests in a school system with over 160,000 students does not support the initial claim that “cops are disciplinarians for things that are not crimes.” Even if we look at the paragraph I didn’t mention, the “paper arrests,” you’ll notice they are STILL criminal activities in nature: assaults, thefts, vandalism, etc. We want police in school to assist with crimes. These are crimes. As for the “almost all,” it comes as no surprise to me that in some rare instances a student may end with a criminal record after committing a crime. I suppose you give no credit to the fact that the same report states most students with paper arrests don’t end up with a record? That right there suggests that an SRO’s presence in a school does not automatically lead to tons of juvenile records.

Administrators have other transgressions to deal with: academic dishonesty, tardiness, basic disrespect, technology misuse, etc. Those are disciplinary issues a school can and should handle. The ones above? They should be the domain of an SRO.

Assaults, thefts, and vandalism are crimes by definition, but no 15 year old should be arrested, on paper or otherwise, for carving their name into a desk, or getting into your average, no deadly weapons involved fistfight, or stealing the stapler from the teacher's desk, but those could all be defined as crimes, if one was so inclined. I'm trying to think of a "mere disciplinary" issue that _couldn't_ be defined as a crime.

+1

[Anonymous]

And lest anyone think I'm just being difficult, let's not forget that report was written by the police department specifically to justify the continued existence of the SRO program, so I don't think it's at all unreasonable to approach it with a critical eye.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

I read those paragraphs prior to posting the data. My point still stands. 27 arrests in a school system with over 160,000 students does not support the initial claim that “cops are disciplinarians for things that are not crimes.” Even if we look at the paragraph I didn’t mention, the “paper arrests,” you’ll notice they are STILL criminal activities in nature: assaults, thefts, vandalism, etc. We want police in school to assist with crimes. These are crimes. As for the “almost all,” it comes as no surprise to me that in some rare instances a student may end with a criminal record after committing a crime. I suppose you give no credit to the fact that the same report states most students with paper arrests don’t end up with a record? That right there suggests that an SRO’s presence in a school does not automatically lead to tons of juvenile records.

Administrators have other transgressions to deal with: academic dishonesty, tardiness, basic disrespect, technology misuse, etc. Those are disciplinary issues a school can and should handle. The ones above? They should be the domain of an SRO.

Assaults, thefts, and vandalism are crimes by definition, but no 15 year old should be arrested, on paper or otherwise, for carving their name into a desk, or getting into your average, no deadly weapons involved fistfight, or stealing the stapler from the teacher's desk, but those could all be defined as crimes, if one was so inclined. I'm trying to think of a "mere disciplinary" issue that _couldn't_ be defined as a crime.

You’re assuming those assaults, thefts, and vandalism “paper crimes” were minor. I’ve taught for 20 years. I handle the minor incidents myself. I’ve never seen anybody call the SRO for things as minor as graffiti or a stolen stapler. Heck, I wouldn’t even involve admin for that. Unfortunately, students do things that can harm others. I have called admin and the SRO for fights, for a knife, and for major theft. Actions, particularly harmful ones, have consequences.

Having an SRO doesn’t mean ALL discipline goes through them. It means they are there when the big things happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

I read those paragraphs prior to posting the data. My point still stands. 27 arrests in a school system with over 160,000 students does not support the initial claim that “cops are disciplinarians for things that are not crimes.” Even if we look at the paragraph I didn’t mention, the “paper arrests,” you’ll notice they are STILL criminal activities in nature: assaults, thefts, vandalism, etc. We want police in school to assist with crimes. These are crimes. As for the “almost all,” it comes as no surprise to me that in some rare instances a student may end with a criminal record after committing a crime. I suppose you give no credit to the fact that the same report states most students with paper arrests don’t end up with a record? That right there suggests that an SRO’s presence in a school does not automatically lead to tons of juvenile records.

Administrators have other transgressions to deal with: academic dishonesty, tardiness, basic disrespect, technology misuse, etc. Those are disciplinary issues a school can and should handle. The ones above? They should be the domain of an SRO.

Assaults, thefts, and vandalism are crimes by definition, but no 15 year old should be arrested, on paper or otherwise, for carving their name into a desk, or getting into your average, no deadly weapons involved fistfight, or stealing the stapler from the teacher's desk, but those could all be defined as crimes, if one was so inclined. I'm trying to think of a "mere disciplinary" issue that _couldn't_ be defined as a crime.

You’re assuming those assaults, thefts, and vandalism “paper crimes” were minor. I’ve taught for 20 years. I handle the minor incidents myself. I’ve never seen anybody call the SRO for things as minor as graffiti or a stolen stapler. Heck, I wouldn’t even involve admin for that. Unfortunately, students do things that can harm others. I have called admin and the SRO for fights, for a knife, and for major theft. Actions, particularly harmful ones, have consequences.

Having an SRO doesn’t mean ALL discipline goes through them. It means they are there when the big things happen.

+1 Some people think in extremes. Part of why this country is going down the tubes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No thanks. I’m a parent with 3 kids in MCPS and I support a police presence in school buildings.

What do you propose as an alternative to keep our kids safe?

+1. I want more counselors, better social / emotional support training for teachers, secured doors, smaller class sizes, and I want SROs. This isn’t an either / or. All of these measures can work together to protect our children.

I glanced at your link. There have been links posted recently that present opposing arguments showing how SROs are effective. I’d take the time to find them and post them again, but I suspect we all know that viewpoints won’t be changed on this thread.

This exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

I read those paragraphs prior to posting the data. My point still stands. 27 arrests in a school system with over 160,000 students does not support the initial claim that “cops are disciplinarians for things that are not crimes.” Even if we look at the paragraph I didn’t mention, the “paper arrests,” you’ll notice they are STILL criminal activities in nature: assaults, thefts, vandalism, etc. We want police in school to assist with crimes. These are crimes. As for the “almost all,” it comes as no surprise to me that in some rare instances a student may end with a criminal record after committing a crime. I suppose you give no credit to the fact that the same report states most students with paper arrests don’t end up with a record? That right there suggests that an SRO’s presence in a school does not automatically lead to tons of juvenile records.

Administrators have other transgressions to deal with: academic dishonesty, tardiness, basic disrespect, technology misuse, etc. Those are disciplinary issues a school can and should handle. The ones above? They should be the domain of an SRO.

Assaults, thefts, and vandalism are crimes by definition, but no 15 year old should be arrested, on paper or otherwise, for carving their name into a desk, or getting into your average, no deadly weapons involved fistfight, or stealing the stapler from the teacher's desk, but those could all be defined as crimes, if one was so inclined. I'm trying to think of a "mere disciplinary" issue that _couldn't_ be defined as a crime.

You’re assuming those assaults, thefts, and vandalism “paper crimes” were minor. I’ve taught for 20 years. I handle the minor incidents myself. I’ve never seen anybody call the SRO for things as minor as graffiti or a stolen stapler. Heck, I wouldn’t even involve admin for that. Unfortunately, students do things that can harm others. I have called admin and the SRO for fights, for a knife, and for major theft. Actions, particularly harmful ones, have consequences.

Having an SRO doesn’t mean ALL discipline goes through them. It means they are there when the big things happen.

I'm not assuming they were minor, I'm saying I have no way of knowing one way or the other. It seems you can be confident that SROs were not involved in minor incidents from your classroom - I'm not contradicting your experience, but this is where this becomes just one anecdote about one person, which I'm much less interested in than the large preponderance of national data showing the net result of SRO involvement in schools is negative.

[Anonymous]

The mass shooting issue is not what the SRO program is for. They are not effective response for that problem. They are pretty effective in pushing the drug dealing and gang activity out of schools. It probably just pushes it into the surrounding community but it’s still a win for teachers and kids not to have to deal with it during school hours.

The question of whether too many disciplinary matters are criminalized is an entirely different matter. Police work for us. If we don’t want things to be criminal, then the police won’t arrest people for them. If school admin decide to handle internally, the police won’t make arrests. As a community, we need to provide direction to our schools and police about what we want handled in what way. All removing SROs does it to remove officers who are familiar with the school dynamics and have training in dealing with you, and replace them with whatever officer happens to be closest. Yes, SROs should get more specialized training—replacing them with officers untrained in these matters is not helpful. Knowledge of the community is also helpful—a good SRO will know if there are groups that have an outstanding beef and can be more proactive in monitoring when those groups may cross paths. A big part of commmujity policing is averting crime just by establishing a presence in anticipated trouble spots.

[Anonymous]

Everyone wants more mental health, smaller classes etc… but those things are very very expensive and the voters won’t vote for that. There aren’t enough mental health care providers in the US as is - where are we getting these people? What other health care services are we going to be providing in school? Where does it stop? If we don’t have the money - what’s the next best thing?

[Anonymous]

If you don't want SRO's what is your solution to what is going on in the schools? I want my kids safe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A student brought a loaded gun to a pgps the other day. Staff member found it, alerted sro, who confiscated it and called police. Seems the presence of sro might have helped police know the situation they were going to encounter. The SRO may also have had knowledge of kid/situation which seems like it would be useful.

These stories touting SROs always lack enough detail to tell whether they were actually necessary to the good outcome. A staff member found the gun - would they not have been able to safely confiscate it without the SRO? Would they not have been able to call police and tell them the situation? If the story was something like "a kid was bragging about their loaded gun so a teacher called police while the SRO engaged the student safely, using their police training" then I would get it, but that's not what it sounds like happened?

Teacher here. I have absolutely no training in guns. I wouldn’t know how to HOLD it properly. Frankly, that’s not my job. SROs have training I don’t have. I want them close, so they are only a minute away when I am alerted to a weapon in my classroom. I don’t want to have to call the police who then have to DRIVE to the school to help out.

Signed - a teacher who has had to call for an SRO to remove a weapon before

Another teacher here who agrees with you. It seems like people really don't want teachers and school administrators to have support for dealing with theae situations. Ok. So we will call the police more often.

People want teachers to have non-cop support for discipline and call cops for crimes.

Currently cops are disciplinarians for thing that are not crimes.

Do you have evidence? Published data suggests otherwise. There were only 27 arrests during the 2019-2020 school year, all for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger to the school environment. Those are crimes and they need to be treated as crimes. I think we can agree that isn’t a lot for the largest school system on Maryland, and it also suggests they are not arresting for things that are merely disciplinary.

I am a teacher AND a parent. I want administrative support for discipline and SRO support for crimes.

No, there were 27 "physical arrests" in 2019-2020 made by SROs. The report you're citing says "A physical arrest is made by an SRO when the type of crime is serious in nature, a felony offense, or presents an immediate or continuing disruption or threat to the safety of others. A student who is 18 years old or older cannot be charged as a juvenile; therefore, a physical arrest is necessary since the case cannot be referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice. A physical arrest usually entails taking the student into custody, transporting the student to a police facility for processing, and making a notification to the Department of Juvenile Justice if the student is under the age of 18. Physical arrests accounted for 10% of all student arrests by SROs in the 2019-2020 School Year and equate to about 1 per high school."

So, let's say you're correct that those 27 arrests were for felonious actions or ones that cause significant danger (actually with so few, I'd have liked to see a breakdown of exactly what those arrests were for, because the definition appears to have some wiggle room in it, particularly "immediate or continuing disruption"). Those are the crimes you say you want SRO support for, but the report says those cases represent only 10% of student arrests by SROs.

The other 90% (242) were referred to as "paper" arrests, and while these students are not physically taken to the police station, their cases are referred to the Department of Juvenile Services. The transgressions ending up with "paper" arrests are described as "misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts, and vandalism". The report says "In almost all these cases, the student does not end up with a criminal record". They are very handy with exact figures elsewhere but we are left to wonder what "almost all" means here. Then there's a third category, for which they do not share numbers, called "civil citations", described as "minor violations that typically carry a monetary penalty. The vast majority of civil citations written are for alcohol, tobacco, and minor CDS offenses." CDS is not defined and the monetary penalties are not described.

You might say all of those things are crimes too - assault, theft, vandalism, illegal substances, CDS (whatever that is). But when we're speaking about children, what are we defining as assault, theft, vandalism, and who decides whether a fist fight is a crime worthy of referral to Juvenile Justice vs a disciplinary matter administrators can handle? I don't think we know at all how many of these events were "merely disciplinary".

I read those paragraphs prior to posting the data. My point still stands. 27 arrests in a school system with over 160,000 students does not support the initial claim that “cops are disciplinarians for things that are not crimes.” Even if we look at the paragraph I didn’t mention, the “paper arrests,” you’ll notice they are STILL criminal activities in nature: assaults, thefts, vandalism, etc. We want police in school to assist with crimes. These are crimes. As for the “almost all,” it comes as no surprise to me that in some rare instances a student may end with a criminal record after committing a crime. I suppose you give no credit to the fact that the same report states most students with paper arrests don’t end up with a record? That right there suggests that an SRO’s presence in a school does not automatically lead to tons of juvenile records.

Administrators have other transgressions to deal with: academic dishonesty, tardiness, basic disrespect, technology misuse, etc. Those are disciplinary issues a school can and should handle. The ones above? They should be the domain of an SRO.

Assaults, thefts, and vandalism are crimes by definition, but no 15 year old should be arrested, on paper or otherwise, for carving their name into a desk, or getting into your average, no deadly weapons involved fistfight, or stealing the stapler from the teacher's desk, but those could all be defined as crimes, if one was so inclined. I'm trying to think of a "mere disciplinary" issue that _couldn't_ be defined as a crime.

You’re assuming those assaults, thefts, and vandalism “paper crimes” were minor. I’ve taught for 20 years. I handle the minor incidents myself. I’ve never seen anybody call the SRO for things as minor as graffiti or a stolen stapler. Heck, I wouldn’t even involve admin for that. Unfortunately, students do things that can harm others. I have called admin and the SRO for fights, for a knife, and for major theft. Actions, particularly harmful ones, have consequences.

Having an SRO doesn’t mean ALL discipline goes through them. It means they are there when the big things happen.

And thank god there are police around schools to threaten to beat five-year-olds when they get out of line. Who will protect us from the dangerous kindergartners?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don't want SRO's what is your solution to what is going on in the schools? I want my kids safe.

Safe from what?

Your post presumes that SROs make schools safer, which certainly isn’t a given.