Reply to Northwood High School Students caught smoking unknown drug in bathroom that made security sick

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Northwood High School Students caught smoking unknown drug in bathroom that made security sick"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If MCPS isn't calling the cops for illegal drug use in schools, which is a GOVERNMENT building, then we need to bring back SROs who will actually do something about it. 
Montgomery county has gone mad. Of course, if students know that there are no REAL repercussions for doing drugs in schools, then it will continue. Duh. Let's get back some common sense, please. [/quote]

More lies. Prove to us all that there are “no REAL repercussions” for drug use at school. Quote the school policy or STFU.[/quote]
There is no official school policy regarding doing drugs on school grounds.  You quote the policy that says this.[/quote]

Have you heard of the MCPS Student Code of Conduct? It's plainly addressed and spelled out there: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/students/rights/0851.22_2022-23_STUDENT_Code%20of%20Conduct_WEB.pdf

"Using, possessing, or being under the influence of illegal drugs" is on page 25 (actual numbered page 15) and the consequences for violating this include anything from:

- Restorative practices
- In-school suspension
- In-school intervention

on the lighter end with level 3 responses and escalate to level 4 responses, which include:

- Restorative practices
- Mentoring programs 
- Short-term out-of-school suspension

Now whether those consequences are drastic or severe enough you can argue, but there's no question that using illegal substances at school violates documented school policy.[/quote]

This is great but we already have laws that cover most of this stuff so not really all that important. It's really a matter for MCPD in the courts.[/quote]

MCPS and MCPD have both said they don't wish to jail or arrest students for drug use at school, only distribution of drugs.

[/quote]

They may not wish to but clearly this current approach isn't working.[/quote]

If they don't want MCPD involved, then these 1-3 day suspensions need to be harsher. Bottomline the kids don't care if they're suspended for a couple of days. 2 weeks? That might be a different story.[/quote]

TBH most of the kids who get suspended don't actually care if they're suspended either. Suspension is usually done to protect the other students and staff from the offending student's behavior [b]or to get the offending student's parents to care and pay attention to the child's misbehavior.[/b][/quote]

And this is why they need to do harsher suspensions. The parents don't mind 2-3 day suspensions but once their kid misses 2 weeks of school, it becomes THEIR problem.. as it should. [/quote]

+1 Kids and their parents need to learn the "pain" of consequences, and the relationship between appropriate behavior and the opportunity to remain in school. An education is a privilege. It's not playtime.[/quote]

An education (K-12) is a right, not a privilege.[/quote]

Unfortunately this is why so many victims of assault and bullying end up moving to another school.   Public education is a right and MCPS makes sure pieces of crap stay in school and they rarely make them change schools too.  [/quote]
It is right, but nothing to say that they can't be educated in a special school for kids with violent behavioral issues.[/quote]

Except for the fact that a powerful and loud wing of the MCPS system, and their activist parents, have fought tooth and nail to avoid separating kids with behavioral issues from the general ed classes in the name of "mainstreaming."

It's a nice theory, but unfortunately it hasn't played out so great in practice as we've all seen.[/quote]

If kids are actually violent in that they're assaulting others, MCPS doesn't get a say in the matter.  This is a matter for MCPD and the courts. There are already laws that cover this and provide consequences so out of MCPS' hands.[/quote]

The RWNJs just want to provide cover for MCPD abdicating their responsibilities and failing our schools.[/quote]

Good to know you think the MCPD should be patrolling every MCPS school each day. [/quote]

Yes, if they know, that there's drug dealing in a school bathroom, they could assign an office to poo patrol.[/quote]
Yes because security, admin and teachers supposedly monitoring the bathrooms for drug use is clearly not a deterrent.[/quote]

Teachers have other responsibilities. Like teaching. They don't get hazard pay for doing MCPD's job.[/quote]

It's MCPD's job to monitor high school bathrooms for drug use? :shock: [/quote]

Yes, just like any other government building. Do you disagree that schools are a government building?[/quote]

I've been in a lot of bathrooms in a lot of government buildings. The number of armed police officers I have encountered in those bathrooms,  monitoring the bathrooms for drug use or anything else, is 0. I have occasionally encountered armed police officers using the bathrooms. I don't think anybody objects to armed police officers using bathrooms.[/quote]

I've been in a lot of government buildings and majority have police officers. We're not asking them to stand inside the bathrooms but would be nice if they were actually in the building. You know, government buildings with 2000+ kids and staff. I guess that's too much to ask.[/quote]

Sure, I read there were armed officers present at Parkland and Uvalde...[/quote]

Hi, you're back again. Do you even live in MoCo; or at least Maryland? Regardless, you clearly are clueless about the data regarding SROs in MCPS. [/quote]

There's nothing special about MCPS for SROs that would make things any different than places like Parkland and Uvalde.[/quote]

Except we're not talking about just protecting students from shooters. We're talking about kids doing illegal drugs; kids beating kids up (or teachers), kids selling drugs, etc. You still need SROs for those. And yes, the data on SROs at MCPS by far and no question indicates that violence and arrests were down when they were in the buildings. [/quote]

So you feel SROs shouldn't protect our children from shooters? [/quote]

Are you this dense in real life?[/quote]

I'm more interested in why you don't want others to know that SROs were present at both parkland and uvalde[/quote]

Holy crap. Dude, EVERYONE KNOWS. Stop claiming that the only reason SROs are in schools is to protect kids from shooters.  EVERYONE knows that SROs are there for overall safety and crime prevention (not just shootings), yes, including the use of and sale of drugs in schools, which is the topic of this entire thread, to begin with.  Goodness, you're dumb.[/quote]

Agree, these are well-known examples where SROs failed to provide safety or prevent crime which makes me question their effectiveness.[/quote]

But you fail to give us examples of how SROs failed in Montgomery County. Stop giving us examples from other states. Thank you.[/quote]
DP but check out Churchill where drugs were rampant, kids passing out, ambulances called when we had SROs[/quote]

You mean, now that we don't have SROs. You have to be asleep if you think violence is down, drug use is down, crime is down.[/quote]
I mean when you had SROs. Kids passing out from overdoses, ambulances called almost every week and kid run over from drug deals gone wrong.
Yes, at Churchill when we had SROs.[/quote]
[b]So, now without SROs Churchill is much better[/b]? LOL. I call BS.

Even MCPS has stated RJ has abysmal success rate, and there has been an uptick in violence and drug use now.[/quote]
There have not been as many ambulances called and kids passing out. So, yes it is better.[/quote]
That's nice for you, but the rest of MCPS is suffering per MCPS own data.  Also, I highly doubt the lower incidence is due to RJ.

https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/council/Resources/Files/agenda/cm/2023/20230320/20230320_PSEC1.pdf[/quote]

So your saying MCPD and the courts are using RJ now or are simply not enforcing the rule of law? [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics