MCPS policies to prevent school shootings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardening schools is not the same thing as achieving school safety. Most school shooters are part of the school community in some way (whether current or in the past) and know the security and blindspots. It has to start with creating a culture of trust and support.

That's not the approach we take for concerts, athletic events or the airport. Why are schools supposed to be a free-for-all when they house our most precious resource?

THIS. No one can seem to answer this fundamental question. Why do we protect concerts, government buildings, sport events, airports, etc. with armed security but not high schools with 2000+ students? Are they not worth protecting? In fact, schools are government buildings.

Because when you go to the airport, a concert or a mall you are around strangers. Because they are strangers there is an inherent amount of distrust being around them. When you go to school with the same students and teachers every day they aren’t strangers. But, having the same types of security signals you shouldn’t trust the people around you every single day. This makes kids feel less safe, not more safe. This is why the focus needs to be on trust not on creating prisons.

Just to add one more thing here, when you exist in that security environment every day you easily see the blindspots. So a student determined to commit violence wants to, they will figure out how. The vast vast majority of incidents are committed by those already connected to the school in some way; it’s not an unknown stranger trying to infiltrate the school. The focus needs to be on prevention— building trust, addressing social skills (SEL), school climate, mental health services, and overall building connection between students and school. And gun control to make sure if an incident does happen it isn’t so immediately deadly.

Even if I buy what you're saying, that the way to make schools safer is to, as you say "build trust, address social skills, school climate, mental health services and overall building connection between students and school," those are all LONG-TERM solutions that would take perhaps years to implement and to see the effect of it.

So let's assume those long-term solutions are viable and worth doing.

What are we doing in the immediate and short-term to prevent the next violent incident from happening next week or next month? What are your solutions for that? That is what most parents are asking and demanding from the schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I understand that districts do need policies of prevention for many things (fire drills, severe weather drills, active shooter drills) the onus on schools is beyond me. It's an awful lot like "what did she do to prevent rape". We're focusing on the wrong things here. The issue is when folks have easy access to guns and are mentally ill. The combination of those two things are THE issue. And yes, I'm aware that most people with mental illnesses aren't violent. But every single person who shoots up people in schools, theaters, grocery stores ARE mentally ill.

I don't understand. You want someone other than the schools to be responsible for safety and security within school buildings. Why? We don't apply that logic anywhere else.

When we have a concert, the event venue and the concert producers are responsible for hiring event security to ensure the safety and wellbeing of concertgoers.

When you go to a nightclub, the nightclub is responsible for hiring security to ensure it's safe and to prevent or minimize violence.

When you go the airport, we have airport security as well as TSA to ensure the safety and security of air travelers.

Why should we not explain schools to develops strategies and dedicate resources toward the physical safety and security of students who they are obligated to safe guard and watch over, due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentisin loco parentis.

I really can't understand this POV that you and others have that schools are not responsible for safety and security within their own buildings.

Outside of the schools and in the communities, no, schools aren't responsible. But inside their school buildings, if they aren't responsible for security, who else should be????

THIS

School systems are responsible for keeping kids safe while they are AT school.

But when it is suuuuper easy for mentally ill folks to get automatic weapons, it is pretty much impossible for schools to provide a safe environment. It's easy to shoot through doors and windows. Should districts retrofit buildings so they are impenetrable? Are tax payers willing to pay for multiple armed guards outside school buildings? (which have also been shown NOT to prevent school shootings)

I agree that schools have a part to play in terms of safety, but they are already doing that. (drills, locked doors, etc) Honestly, I think schools should completely stop allowing anyone in buildings who is not a staff member. No more parents in schools, no volunteers, no assemblies, nothing. No one who isn't employed by the district should be allowed in, ever. No more open house, no more parents dropping off lunches or forgotten materials, no more in person conferences, no sporting events, no theater productions. Why allow anyone in a school ever? It's clearly not safe.

Yes, they should make the buildings safer with bulletproof glass, cameras in every room/area outside the bathroom and have adults monoriting the bathroom. Parents coming into the school isn't as much an issue as students/staff violence. Volunteers should be background checked before volunteering. Staff should have yearly background checks. There should be metal detectors or other devices to check personal belongings.

We waste so much money on silly stuff. That money can be used for armed guards. Yes, I am willing to pay.

People always say they are willing to pay for stuff until they see the cost. I can guarantee if people had to face the cost of retrofitting the entire MCPS school district with bulletproof glass, armed security, metal detectors, people to monitor the detectors, require clear boom bags of all students, individual badging into school and all the extra time in the morning and afternoons that would be required, there would be a call for “reasonable security measures.” How do I know l this, becuase people are willing to pay for things that benefit their kids, that doesn’t mean they feel the same about dramatic increasing taxes to cover things that benefit others.

[Anonymous]

While y'all argue schools aren't responsible for safety and security, Abigail Zwerner, the teacher who was shot by the 6 year old at Richneck Elementary, is suing the school district for $40 million for failing to protect her: https://people.com/crime/virginia-teacher-six-year-old-shot-in-class-lawsuit-40-million/

A Virginia teacher who was shot by a 6-year-old student is suing the administrators of her school for $40M.

Abigail Zwerner of Newport News, Virginia, named several defendants in her lawsuit, including the School Board of Richneck Elementary School where the incident took place, former schools Superintendent George Parker III, former Richneck principal Briana Foster Newton, and former Richneck vice principal Ebony Parker, PEOPLE has confirmed.

According to the 20-page complaint seen by PEOPLE, the vice principal was warned multiple times by different teachers on the day of the shooting that the child involved was behaving violently and reportedly had a gun.

Specifically, the suit alleges that she breached "her assumed duty" to protect Zwerner, "despite multiple reports that a firearm was on school property and likely in possession of a violent individual."

Furthermore, she is specifically calling out the school district and administration's policy of not enforcing discipline and consequences in the name of being "sensitive" to social-emotional needs as a root cause of her harm:

"Teachers' concerns with John Doe's behavior was regularly brought to the attention of Richneck Elementary School administration, and the concerns were always dismissed," Zwerner's suit alleges. "Often when he was taken to the school office to address his behavior, he would return to the classroom shortly thereafter with some type of reward, such as a piece of candy."

Like it or not, school districts will be held accountable for their lack of planning and seriousness with regard to student and educator wellbeing and safety. Time is up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardening schools is not the same thing as achieving school safety. Most school shooters are part of the school community in some way (whether current or in the past) and know the security and blindspots. It has to start with creating a culture of trust and support.

That's not the approach we take for concerts, athletic events or the airport. Why are schools supposed to be a free-for-all when they house our most precious resource?

THIS. No one can seem to answer this fundamental question. Why do we protect concerts, government buildings, sport events, airports, etc. with armed security but not high schools with 2000+ students? Are they not worth protecting? In fact, schools are government buildings.

Because when you go to the airport, a concert or a mall you are around strangers. Because they are strangers there is an inherent amount of distrust being around them. When you go to school with the same students and teachers every day they aren’t strangers. But, having the same types of security signals you shouldn’t trust the people around you every single day. This makes kids feel less safe, not more safe. This is why the focus needs to be on trust not on creating prisons.

Just to add one more thing here, when you exist in that security environment every day you easily see the blindspots. So a student determined to commit violence wants to, they will figure out how. The vast vast majority of incidents are committed by those already connected to the school in some way; it’s not an unknown stranger trying to infiltrate the school. The focus needs to be on prevention— building trust, addressing social skills (SEL), school climate, mental health services, and overall building connection between students and school. And gun control to make sure if an incident does happen it isn’t so immediately deadly.

Even if I buy what you're saying, that the way to make schools safer is to, as you say "build trust, address social skills, school climate, mental health services and overall building connection between students and school," those are all LONG-TERM solutions that would take perhaps years to implement and to see the effect of it.

So let's assume those long-term solutions are viable and worth doing.

What are we doing in the immediate and short-term to prevent the next violent incident from happening next week or next month? What are your solutions for that? That is what most parents are asking and demanding from the schools.

This is a federal problem. We need real gun control and reform of gun laws. If only the GOP weren't in the pocket of the NRA...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardening schools is not the same thing as achieving school safety. Most school shooters are part of the school community in some way (whether current or in the past) and know the security and blindspots. It has to start with creating a culture of trust and support.

That's not the approach we take for concerts, athletic events or the airport. Why are schools supposed to be a free-for-all when they house our most precious resource?

THIS. No one can seem to answer this fundamental question. Why do we protect concerts, government buildings, sport events, airports, etc. with armed security but not high schools with 2000+ students? Are they not worth protecting? In fact, schools are government buildings.

Because when you go to the airport, a concert or a mall you are around strangers. Because they are strangers there is an inherent amount of distrust being around them. When you go to school with the same students and teachers every day they aren’t strangers. But, having the same types of security signals you shouldn’t trust the people around you every single day. This makes kids feel less safe, not more safe. This is why the focus needs to be on trust not on creating prisons.

Just to add one more thing here, when you exist in that security environment every day you easily see the blindspots. So a student determined to commit violence wants to, they will figure out how. The vast vast majority of incidents are committed by those already connected to the school in some way; it’s not an unknown stranger trying to infiltrate the school. The focus needs to be on prevention— building trust, addressing social skills (SEL), school climate, mental health services, and overall building connection between students and school. And gun control to make sure if an incident does happen it isn’t so immediately deadly.

Even if I buy what you're saying, that the way to make schools safer is to, as you say "build trust, address social skills, school climate, mental health services and overall building connection between students and school," those are all LONG-TERM solutions that would take perhaps years to implement and to see the effect of it.

So let's assume those long-term solutions are viable and worth doing.

What are we doing in the immediate and short-term to prevent the next violent incident from happening next week or next month? What are your solutions for that? That is what most parents are asking and demanding from the schools.

This is a federal problem. We need real gun control and reform of gun laws. If only the GOP weren't in the pocket of the NRA...

You failed to answer the question. What are your immediate and short-term solutions to prevent the next violent school incident from happening next week or next month?

Saying it's a federal problem doesn't address the question. Unless you're saying the federal government should take over running all of our schools and circumvent local school administration?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardening schools is not the same thing as achieving school safety. Most school shooters are part of the school community in some way (whether current or in the past) and know the security and blindspots. It has to start with creating a culture of trust and support.

That's not the approach we take for concerts, athletic events or the airport. Why are schools supposed to be a free-for-all when they house our most precious resource?

THIS. No one can seem to answer this fundamental question. Why do we protect concerts, government buildings, sport events, airports, etc. with armed security but not high schools with 2000+ students? Are they not worth protecting? In fact, schools are government buildings.

Because when you go to the airport, a concert or a mall you are around strangers. Because they are strangers there is an inherent amount of distrust being around them. When you go to school with the same students and teachers every day they aren’t strangers. But, having the same types of security signals you shouldn’t trust the people around you every single day. This makes kids feel less safe, not more safe. This is why the focus needs to be on trust not on creating prisons.

Just to add one more thing here, when you exist in that security environment every day you easily see the blindspots. So a student determined to commit violence wants to, they will figure out how. The vast vast majority of incidents are committed by those already connected to the school in some way; it’s not an unknown stranger trying to infiltrate the school. The focus needs to be on prevention— building trust, addressing social skills (SEL), school climate, mental health services, and overall building connection between students and school. And gun control to make sure if an incident does happen it isn’t so immediately deadly.

Even if I buy what you're saying, that the way to make schools safer is to, as you say "build trust, address social skills, school climate, mental health services and overall building connection between students and school," those are all LONG-TERM solutions that would take perhaps years to implement and to see the effect of it.

So let's assume those long-term solutions are viable and worth doing.

What are we doing in the immediate and short-term to prevent the next violent incident from happening next week or next month? What are your solutions for that? That is what most parents are asking and demanding from the schools.

This is a federal problem. We need real gun control and reform of gun laws. If only the GOP weren't in the pocket of the NRA...

Exactly and those pretending otherwise are just trying to conceal the real problem and advocate for their personal agenda which won't make schools safer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I understand that districts do need policies of prevention for many things (fire drills, severe weather drills, active shooter drills) the onus on schools is beyond me. It's an awful lot like "what did she do to prevent rape". We're focusing on the wrong things here. The issue is when folks have easy access to guns and are mentally ill. The combination of those two things are THE issue. And yes, I'm aware that most people with mental illnesses aren't violent. But every single person who shoots up people in schools, theaters, grocery stores ARE mentally ill.

I don't understand. You want someone other than the schools to be responsible for safety and security within school buildings. Why? We don't apply that logic anywhere else.

When we have a concert, the event venue and the concert producers are responsible for hiring event security to ensure the safety and wellbeing of concertgoers.

When you go to a nightclub, the nightclub is responsible for hiring security to ensure it's safe and to prevent or minimize violence.

When you go the airport, we have airport security as well as TSA to ensure the safety and security of air travelers.

Why should we not explain schools to develops strategies and dedicate resources toward the physical safety and security of students who they are obligated to safe guard and watch over, due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentisin loco parentis.

I really can't understand this POV that you and others have that schools are not responsible for safety and security within their own buildings.

Outside of the schools and in the communities, no, schools aren't responsible. But inside their school buildings, if they aren't responsible for security, who else should be????

THIS

School systems are responsible for keeping kids safe while they are AT school.

But when it is suuuuper easy for mentally ill folks to get automatic weapons, it is pretty much impossible for schools to provide a safe environment. It's easy to shoot through doors and windows. Should districts retrofit buildings so they are impenetrable? Are tax payers willing to pay for multiple armed guards outside school buildings? (which have also been shown NOT to prevent school shootings)

I agree that schools have a part to play in terms of safety, but they are already doing that. (drills, locked doors, etc) Honestly, I think schools should completely stop allowing anyone in buildings who is not a staff member. No more parents in schools, no volunteers, no assemblies, nothing. No one who isn't employed by the district should be allowed in, ever. No more open house, no more parents dropping off lunches or forgotten materials, no more in person conferences, no sporting events, no theater productions. Why allow anyone in a school ever? It's clearly not safe.

Yes, they should make the buildings safer with bulletproof glass, cameras in every room/area outside the bathroom and have adults monoriting the bathroom. Parents coming into the school isn't as much an issue as students/staff violence. Volunteers should be background checked before volunteering. Staff should have yearly background checks. There should be metal detectors or other devices to check personal belongings.

We waste so much money on silly stuff. That money can be used for armed guards. Yes, I am willing to pay.

People always say they are willing to pay for stuff until they see the cost. I can guarantee if people had to face the cost of retrofitting the entire MCPS school district with bulletproof glass, armed security, metal detectors, people to monitor the detectors, require clear boom bags of all students, individual badging into school and all the extra time in the morning and afternoons that would be required, there would be a call for “reasonable security measures.” How do I know l this, becuase people are willing to pay for things that benefit their kids, that doesn’t mean they feel the same about dramatic increasing taxes to cover things that benefit others.

MCPS has a lot of wasteful spending they can cut. Let's start there for funding. Of all the things to spend money on, safety should be a priority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I understand that districts do need policies of prevention for many things (fire drills, severe weather drills, active shooter drills) the onus on schools is beyond me. It's an awful lot like "what did she do to prevent rape". We're focusing on the wrong things here. The issue is when folks have easy access to guns and are mentally ill. The combination of those two things are THE issue. And yes, I'm aware that most people with mental illnesses aren't violent. But every single person who shoots up people in schools, theaters, grocery stores ARE mentally ill.

I don't understand. You want someone other than the schools to be responsible for safety and security within school buildings. Why? We don't apply that logic anywhere else.

When we have a concert, the event venue and the concert producers are responsible for hiring event security to ensure the safety and wellbeing of concertgoers.

When you go to a nightclub, the nightclub is responsible for hiring security to ensure it's safe and to prevent or minimize violence.

When you go the airport, we have airport security as well as TSA to ensure the safety and security of air travelers.

Why should we not explain schools to develops strategies and dedicate resources toward the physical safety and security of students who they are obligated to safe guard and watch over, due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentisin loco parentis.

I really can't understand this POV that you and others have that schools are not responsible for safety and security within their own buildings.

Outside of the schools and in the communities, no, schools aren't responsible. But inside their school buildings, if they aren't responsible for security, who else should be????

THIS

School systems are responsible for keeping kids safe while they are AT school.

But when it is suuuuper easy for mentally ill folks to get automatic weapons, it is pretty much impossible for schools to provide a safe environment. It's easy to shoot through doors and windows. Should districts retrofit buildings so they are impenetrable? Are tax payers willing to pay for multiple armed guards outside school buildings? (which have also been shown NOT to prevent school shootings)

I agree that schools have a part to play in terms of safety, but they are already doing that. (drills, locked doors, etc) Honestly, I think schools should completely stop allowing anyone in buildings who is not a staff member. No more parents in schools, no volunteers, no assemblies, nothing. No one who isn't employed by the district should be allowed in, ever. No more open house, no more parents dropping off lunches or forgotten materials, no more in person conferences, no sporting events, no theater productions. Why allow anyone in a school ever? It's clearly not safe.

Yes, they should make the buildings safer with bulletproof glass, cameras in every room/area outside the bathroom and have adults monoriting the bathroom. Parents coming into the school isn't as much an issue as students/staff violence. Volunteers should be background checked before volunteering. Staff should have yearly background checks. There should be metal detectors or other devices to check personal belongings.

We waste so much money on silly stuff. That money can be used for armed guards. Yes, I am willing to pay.

People always say they are willing to pay for stuff until they see the cost. I can guarantee if people had to face the cost of retrofitting the entire MCPS school district with bulletproof glass, armed security, metal detectors, people to monitor the detectors, require clear boom bags of all students, individual badging into school and all the extra time in the morning and afternoons that would be required, there would be a call for “reasonable security measures.” How do I know l this, becuase people are willing to pay for things that benefit their kids, that doesn’t mean they feel the same about dramatic increasing taxes to cover things that benefit others.

MCPS has a lot of wasteful spending they can cut. Let's start there for funding. Of all the things to spend money on, safety should be a priority.

Tremendous. I agree. What is YOUR proposal for how to make that happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I understand that districts do need policies of prevention for many things (fire drills, severe weather drills, active shooter drills) the onus on schools is beyond me. It's an awful lot like "what did she do to prevent rape". We're focusing on the wrong things here. The issue is when folks have easy access to guns and are mentally ill. The combination of those two things are THE issue. And yes, I'm aware that most people with mental illnesses aren't violent. But every single person who shoots up people in schools, theaters, grocery stores ARE mentally ill.

I don't understand. You want someone other than the schools to be responsible for safety and security within school buildings. Why? We don't apply that logic anywhere else.

When we have a concert, the event venue and the concert producers are responsible for hiring event security to ensure the safety and wellbeing of concertgoers.

When you go to a nightclub, the nightclub is responsible for hiring security to ensure it's safe and to prevent or minimize violence.

When you go the airport, we have airport security as well as TSA to ensure the safety and security of air travelers.

Why should we not explain schools to develops strategies and dedicate resources toward the physical safety and security of students who they are obligated to safe guard and watch over, due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentisin loco parentis.

I really can't understand this POV that you and others have that schools are not responsible for safety and security within their own buildings.

Outside of the schools and in the communities, no, schools aren't responsible. But inside their school buildings, if they aren't responsible for security, who else should be????

THIS

School systems are responsible for keeping kids safe while they are AT school.

But when it is suuuuper easy for mentally ill folks to get automatic weapons, it is pretty much impossible for schools to provide a safe environment. It's easy to shoot through doors and windows. Should districts retrofit buildings so they are impenetrable? Are tax payers willing to pay for multiple armed guards outside school buildings? (which have also been shown NOT to prevent school shootings)

I agree that schools have a part to play in terms of safety, but they are already doing that. (drills, locked doors, etc) Honestly, I think schools should completely stop allowing anyone in buildings who is not a staff member. No more parents in schools, no volunteers, no assemblies, nothing. No one who isn't employed by the district should be allowed in, ever. No more open house, no more parents dropping off lunches or forgotten materials, no more in person conferences, no sporting events, no theater productions. Why allow anyone in a school ever? It's clearly not safe.

Yes, they should make the buildings safer with bulletproof glass, cameras in every room/area outside the bathroom and have adults monoriting the bathroom. Parents coming into the school isn't as much an issue as students/staff violence. Volunteers should be background checked before volunteering. Staff should have yearly background checks. There should be metal detectors or other devices to check personal belongings.

We waste so much money on silly stuff. That money can be used for armed guards. Yes, I am willing to pay.

People always say they are willing to pay for stuff until they see the cost. I can guarantee if people had to face the cost of retrofitting the entire MCPS school district with bulletproof glass, armed security, metal detectors, people to monitor the detectors, require clear boom bags of all students, individual badging into school and all the extra time in the morning and afternoons that would be required, there would be a call for “reasonable security measures.” How do I know l this, becuase people are willing to pay for things that benefit their kids, that doesn’t mean they feel the same about dramatic increasing taxes to cover things that benefit others.

MCPS has a lot of wasteful spending they can cut. Let's start there for funding. Of all the things to spend money on, safety should be a priority.

Tremendous. I agree. What is YOUR proposal for how to make that happen?

Start with a huge audit/external like they do with every study and survey, and have an outside accountant go line by line expenditures and get rid of anything unnecessary. That will free up a lot of money to give staff raises, hire security, and repair falling down buildings and put safety measures in the buildings. And, with the money they have left over, buy textbooks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School shootings are not the problem. Regular school violence is. You are far more likely to have another Magruder than a Parkland.

And MCPS does not care.

Regardless we need more security.

The approach is different.

SROs (police in general) would help reduce everyday violence.
Gun safety laws would reduce mass shootings.


Still, MCPS does not care.

This is what SROs are usually good for: harassing and mishandling minorities. They don't reduce any violence.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/black-substitute-teacher-gets-grabbed-by-her-throat-by-a-cop-and-dragged-down-the-hallway-for-trying-to-break-up-a-fight/ar-AA19vYvN?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=3b7073b82cbc45fcdc274bd8bd8b15fa&ei=15

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While y'all argue schools aren't responsible for safety and security, Abigail Zwerner, the teacher who was shot by the 6 year old at Richneck Elementary, is suing the school district for $40 million for failing to protect her: https://people.com/crime/virginia-teacher-six-year-old-shot-in-class-lawsuit-40-million/

A Virginia teacher who was shot by a 6-year-old student is suing the administrators of her school for $40M.

Abigail Zwerner of Newport News, Virginia, named several defendants in her lawsuit, including the School Board of Richneck Elementary School where the incident took place, former schools Superintendent George Parker III, former Richneck principal Briana Foster Newton, and former Richneck vice principal Ebony Parker, PEOPLE has confirmed.

According to the 20-page complaint seen by PEOPLE, the vice principal was warned multiple times by different teachers on the day of the shooting that the child involved was behaving violently and reportedly had a gun.

Specifically, the suit alleges that she breached "her assumed duty" to protect Zwerner, "despite multiple reports that a firearm was on school property and likely in possession of a violent individual."

Furthermore, she is specifically calling out the school district and administration's policy of not enforcing discipline and consequences in the name of being "sensitive" to social-emotional needs as a root cause of her harm:

"Teachers' concerns with John Doe's behavior was regularly brought to the attention of Richneck Elementary School administration, and the concerns were always dismissed," Zwerner's suit alleges. "Often when he was taken to the school office to address his behavior, he would return to the classroom shortly thereafter with some type of reward, such as a piece of candy."

Like it or not, school districts will be held accountable for their lack of planning and seriousness with regard to student and educator wellbeing and safety. Time is up.

Here's my question: Why aren't school districts sued then when mass shooters hit? If Abby can sue (and she should), then parents with kids who die or survive school shootings should be able to sue too. And if every school victimized by mass shooting was sued, the entire school system would collapse because there are so many shootings. OR insurance companies would stop being willing to insure schools, which would also cause them to shut down. I actually hope parents will be able to sue, because then if schools close, something will have to be done about guns once and for all. Let them close. It's time for the 2nd amendment to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I understand that districts do need policies of prevention for many things (fire drills, severe weather drills, active shooter drills) the onus on schools is beyond me. It's an awful lot like "what did she do to prevent rape". We're focusing on the wrong things here. The issue is when folks have easy access to guns and are mentally ill. The combination of those two things are THE issue. And yes, I'm aware that most people with mental illnesses aren't violent. But every single person who shoots up people in schools, theaters, grocery stores ARE mentally ill.

I don't understand. You want someone other than the schools to be responsible for safety and security within school buildings. Why? We don't apply that logic anywhere else.

When we have a concert, the event venue and the concert producers are responsible for hiring event security to ensure the safety and wellbeing of concertgoers.

When you go to a nightclub, the nightclub is responsible for hiring security to ensure it's safe and to prevent or minimize violence.

When you go the airport, we have airport security as well as TSA to ensure the safety and security of air travelers.

Why should we not explain schools to develops strategies and dedicate resources toward the physical safety and security of students who they are obligated to safe guard and watch over, due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentisin loco parentis.

I really can't understand this POV that you and others have that schools are not responsible for safety and security within their own buildings.

Outside of the schools and in the communities, no, schools aren't responsible. But inside their school buildings, if they aren't responsible for security, who else should be????

THIS

School systems are responsible for keeping kids safe while they are AT school.

But when it is suuuuper easy for mentally ill folks to get automatic weapons, it is pretty much impossible for schools to provide a safe environment. It's easy to shoot through doors and windows. Should districts retrofit buildings so they are impenetrable? Are tax payers willing to pay for multiple armed guards outside school buildings? (which have also been shown NOT to prevent school shootings)

I agree that schools have a part to play in terms of safety, but they are already doing that. (drills, locked doors, etc) Honestly, I think schools should completely stop allowing anyone in buildings who is not a staff member. No more parents in schools, no volunteers, no assemblies, nothing. No one who isn't employed by the district should be allowed in, ever. No more open house, no more parents dropping off lunches or forgotten materials, no more in person conferences, no sporting events, no theater productions. Why allow anyone in a school ever? It's clearly not safe.

Yes, they should make the buildings safer with bulletproof glass, cameras in every room/area outside the bathroom and have adults monoriting the bathroom. Parents coming into the school isn't as much an issue as students/staff violence. Volunteers should be background checked before volunteering. Staff should have yearly background checks. There should be metal detectors or other devices to check personal belongings.

We waste so much money on silly stuff. That money can be used for armed guards. Yes, I am willing to pay.

People always say they are willing to pay for stuff until they see the cost. I can guarantee if people had to face the cost of retrofitting the entire MCPS school district with bulletproof glass, armed security, metal detectors, people to monitor the detectors, require clear boom bags of all students, individual badging into school and all the extra time in the morning and afternoons that would be required, there would be a call for “reasonable security measures.” How do I know l this, becuase people are willing to pay for things that benefit their kids, that doesn’t mean they feel the same about dramatic increasing taxes to cover things that benefit others.

MCPS has a lot of wasteful spending they can cut. Let's start there for funding. Of all the things to spend money on, safety should be a priority.

Tremendous. I agree. What is YOUR proposal for how to make that happen?

Start with a huge audit/external like they do with every study and survey, and have an outside accountant go line by line expenditures and get rid of anything unnecessary. That will free up a lot of money to give staff raises, hire security, and repair falling down buildings and put safety measures in the buildings. And, with the money they have left over, buy textbooks.

Where do you think the district can find an auditor who has the knowledge to apply on the question of what is and is not “necessary”? Serious question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While y'all argue schools aren't responsible for safety and security, Abigail Zwerner, the teacher who was shot by the 6 year old at Richneck Elementary, is suing the school district for $40 million for failing to protect her: https://people.com/crime/virginia-teacher-six-year-old-shot-in-class-lawsuit-40-million/

A Virginia teacher who was shot by a 6-year-old student is suing the administrators of her school for $40M.

Abigail Zwerner of Newport News, Virginia, named several defendants in her lawsuit, including the School Board of Richneck Elementary School where the incident took place, former schools Superintendent George Parker III, former Richneck principal Briana Foster Newton, and former Richneck vice principal Ebony Parker, PEOPLE has confirmed.

According to the 20-page complaint seen by PEOPLE, the vice principal was warned multiple times by different teachers on the day of the shooting that the child involved was behaving violently and reportedly had a gun.

Specifically, the suit alleges that she breached "her assumed duty" to protect Zwerner, "despite multiple reports that a firearm was on school property and likely in possession of a violent individual."

Furthermore, she is specifically calling out the school district and administration's policy of not enforcing discipline and consequences in the name of being "sensitive" to social-emotional needs as a root cause of her harm:

"Teachers' concerns with John Doe's behavior was regularly brought to the attention of Richneck Elementary School administration, and the concerns were always dismissed," Zwerner's suit alleges. "Often when he was taken to the school office to address his behavior, he would return to the classroom shortly thereafter with some type of reward, such as a piece of candy."

Like it or not, school districts will be held accountable for their lack of planning and seriousness with regard to student and educator wellbeing and safety. Time is up.

Here's my question: Why aren't school districts sued then when mass shooters hit? If Abby can sue (and she should), then parents with kids who die or survive school shootings should be able to sue too. And if every school victimized by mass shooting was sued, the entire school system would collapse because there are so many shootings. OR insurance companies would stop being willing to insure schools, which would also cause them to shut down. I actually hope parents will be able to sue, because then if schools close, something will have to be done about guns once and for all. Let them close. It's time for the 2nd amendment to go.

The actual legal answer is much worse, unfortunately. Zwerner, as an employee, has an expectation that the school district, as her employer, will provide for her safety that kids in school, as students, cannot legally have of the exact same district entity. It’s absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While y'all argue schools aren't responsible for safety and security, Abigail Zwerner, the teacher who was shot by the 6 year old at Richneck Elementary, is suing the school district for $40 million for failing to protect her: https://people.com/crime/virginia-teacher-six-year-old-shot-in-class-lawsuit-40-million/

A Virginia teacher who was shot by a 6-year-old student is suing the administrators of her school for $40M.

Abigail Zwerner of Newport News, Virginia, named several defendants in her lawsuit, including the School Board of Richneck Elementary School where the incident took place, former schools Superintendent George Parker III, former Richneck principal Briana Foster Newton, and former Richneck vice principal Ebony Parker, PEOPLE has confirmed.

According to the 20-page complaint seen by PEOPLE, the vice principal was warned multiple times by different teachers on the day of the shooting that the child involved was behaving violently and reportedly had a gun.

Specifically, the suit alleges that she breached "her assumed duty" to protect Zwerner, "despite multiple reports that a firearm was on school property and likely in possession of a violent individual."

Furthermore, she is specifically calling out the school district and administration's policy of not enforcing discipline and consequences in the name of being "sensitive" to social-emotional needs as a root cause of her harm:

"Teachers' concerns with John Doe's behavior was regularly brought to the attention of Richneck Elementary School administration, and the concerns were always dismissed," Zwerner's suit alleges. "Often when he was taken to the school office to address his behavior, he would return to the classroom shortly thereafter with some type of reward, such as a piece of candy."

Like it or not, school districts will be held accountable for their lack of planning and seriousness with regard to student and educator wellbeing and safety. Time is up.

Lack of planning? More like refusal to implement effective consequences for violent behavior. This is their intent, people. Wake up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While y'all argue schools aren't responsible for safety and security, Abigail Zwerner, the teacher who was shot by the 6 year old at Richneck Elementary, is suing the school district for $40 million for failing to protect her: https://people.com/crime/virginia-teacher-six-year-old-shot-in-class-lawsuit-40-million/

A Virginia teacher who was shot by a 6-year-old student is suing the administrators of her school for $40M.

Abigail Zwerner of Newport News, Virginia, named several defendants in her lawsuit, including the School Board of Richneck Elementary School where the incident took place, former schools Superintendent George Parker III, former Richneck principal Briana Foster Newton, and former Richneck vice principal Ebony Parker, PEOPLE has confirmed.

According to the 20-page complaint seen by PEOPLE, the vice principal was warned multiple times by different teachers on the day of the shooting that the child involved was behaving violently and reportedly had a gun.

Specifically, the suit alleges that she breached "her assumed duty" to protect Zwerner, "despite multiple reports that a firearm was on school property and likely in possession of a violent individual."

Furthermore, she is specifically calling out the school district and administration's policy of not enforcing discipline and consequences in the name of being "sensitive" to social-emotional needs as a root cause of her harm:

"Teachers' concerns with John Doe's behavior was regularly brought to the attention of Richneck Elementary School administration, and the concerns were always dismissed," Zwerner's suit alleges. "Often when he was taken to the school office to address his behavior, he would return to the classroom shortly thereafter with some type of reward, such as a piece of candy."

Like it or not, school districts will be held accountable for their lack of planning and seriousness with regard to student and educator wellbeing and safety. Time is up.

Lack of planning? More like refusal to implement effective consequences for violent behavior. This is their intent, people. Wake up.

This is whose intent?