Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

This is basically as useful as "thoughts and prayers."

Our elected officials are disinclined to do anything about gun control. It sucks, but it's true. So simply saying "gun control, gun control, gun control" three times in the mirror is basically as effective as praying to your Space Daddy to keep the kids safe.

In the absence of the protective hand of Space Daddy, and in the absence of federal gun legislation, what concrete actions will be useful in keeping kids safe in school?

Effective advocacy for common sense gun laws.

Gun control laws and arguing for MCPS to have them is silly. Those are at the state and federal level and MCPS has no control over that. It is a separate issue. The question is what can MCPS do to keep our students and staff safe?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

This is basically as useful as "thoughts and prayers."

Our elected officials are disinclined to do anything about gun control. It sucks, but it's true. So simply saying "gun control, gun control, gun control" three times in the mirror is basically as effective as praying to your Space Daddy to keep the kids safe.

In the absence of the protective hand of Space Daddy, and in the absence of federal gun legislation, what concrete actions will be useful in keeping kids safe in school?

Effective advocacy for common sense gun laws.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of security theater out there, with SROs and metal detectors on the list. It makes some parents happy without doing much.

SRO's, CRO's and security guards do far more than you realize. The do nothing approach didn't work. Now its time for action.

I’ve often wondered if the anti-SRO crowd has actually met an SRO. I’ve worked with four different SROs during my career as a teacher. They got to know the students, showed up at events, cheered on our teams, and served as vital members of the school community. I watched one talk to a my student about a bad decision, and I was in awe of her compassion and ability to reason with the boy. He was on the verge of making a bad choice, and he didn’t. I watched another SRO calmly take a butcher knife from a student, deescalating one of the scariest moments of my career.

But the anti-SRO types scream about “narcing” and “arresting,” despite the fact arrest statistics for MCPS are extremely low.

I wonder if their hate for SROs simply stems from hate for police in general. In Montgomery County, that’s pretty likely. We certainly love to hate our police here.

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

This is basically as useful as "thoughts and prayers."

Our elected officials are disinclined to do anything about gun control. It sucks, but it's true. So simply saying "gun control, gun control, gun control" three times in the mirror is basically as effective as praying to your Space Daddy to keep the kids safe.

In the absence of the protective hand of Space Daddy, and in the absence of federal gun legislation, what concrete actions will be useful in keeping kids safe in school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

We already have gun laws.

Heck, kids aren't supposed to be smoking weed at school - yet, the bathrooms are filled with weed, and fentanyl and other drugs.

We have drug laws, but those don't keep drugs out of our schools.

We have laws about bomb threats, but we now know that those don't apply to kids under the age of 13. So, we still had a rash of bomb threats in MCPS.

We have laws protecting kids from sexual assault, but we have rapes in our schools.

And so therefore we should just get rid of laws about drugs, bombs, and sexual assaults? Is that what you're saying? There are laws against murder, but people still murder, therefore we shouldn't have laws against murder?

DP.
It’s pointless to throw MORE laws around when the EXISTING laws aren’t followed or enforced. I’m all for gun control, but I’m also a realist. Do you think gun violence is always being committed by people who own the guns lawfully? If a person is willing to break the law, won’t they be willing to break one or two more? So fine… write all the gun laws you want. Then what? NOTHING will change without enforcement.

Someone upthread said we don’t need police in schools. We just need more gun laws. Again: how will that help? More laws and no enforcement?

When it comes down to reason and logic: the schools need security and the EXISTING rules enforced. Let’s start there.

Exactly.

One of the guns brought to a school recently was a ghost gun.

DC has all sorts of gun laws and no shortage of guns.

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of security theater out there, with SROs and metal detectors on the list. It makes some parents happy without doing much.

SRO's, CRO's and security guards do far more than you realize. The do nothing approach didn't work. Now its time for action.

There's a lot of security theater out there, with SROs and metal detectors on the list. It makes some parents happy without doing much.

If the government wanted gun control laws they would do it. They don’t and it’s not happening. This is an issue within mcps so what can mcps do to keep our kids safe? They cannot do anything about gun control laws. So, what they can do is metal and other detectors, security cameras, more security what ever you want to call it and getting tuff with kids with rules and consequences. Our hs is so relaxed and the principal prefers to be friends vs a principal. That’s half the problem right there. Thank goodness for a few good no nonsense teachers who set a tone in their classrooms and have control.

Anonymous wrote:I would agree with bringing back SROs, consequences at school (not RJ), and common sense gun laws. And given the current climate none of this will happen

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

We already have gun laws.

Heck, kids aren't supposed to be smoking weed at school - yet, the bathrooms are filled with weed, and fentanyl and other drugs.

We have drug laws, but those don't keep drugs out of our schools.

We have laws about bomb threats, but we now know that those don't apply to kids under the age of 13. So, we still had a rash of bomb threats in MCPS.

We have laws protecting kids from sexual assault, but we have rapes in our schools.

And so therefore we should just get rid of laws about drugs, bombs, and sexual assaults? Is that what you're saying? There are laws against murder, but people still murder, therefore we shouldn't have laws against murder?

DP.
It’s pointless to throw MORE laws around when the EXISTING laws aren’t followed or enforced. I’m all for gun control, but I’m also a realist. Do you think gun violence is always being committed by people who own the guns lawfully? If a person is willing to break the law, won’t they be willing to break one or two more? So fine… write all the gun laws you want. Then what? NOTHING will change without enforcement.

Someone upthread said we don’t need police in schools. We just need more gun laws. Again: how will that help? More laws and no enforcement?

When it comes down to reason and logic: the schools need security and the EXISTING rules enforced. Let’s start there.

No. No, it's not. No. That's like saying, "It's pointless to go buy MORE food when the EXISTING food hasn't been eaten."

You are not, actually, all for gun control.

Okay. Dismiss my point simply because you don’t like it. I don’t own guns. I don’t like guns.

I just don’t see the point of writing laws when we don’t enforce existing ones.

But if you feel that writing more laws will help, have at it. I’m certainly not stopping you. Just don’t expect anything to change for all those efforts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

+1000

I'm baffled how anyone can say this. I bet you don't want SROs either. So no SROs, no metal detectors- just common-sense gun laws will do?
Can we take out the metal detectors at government buildings and airports then if all we need are common-sense gun laws?

First let's talk about whether metal detectors IN SCHOOLS are effective at preventing or deterring violence. Which they are not. They're not effective, and they're not cost-effective.

You keep saying this, and yet the schools that have suffered from gun violence, like Richneck, immediately turn to them after they've suffered an attack.

I think it's fair to say it's debatable HOW effective weapons detection systems are, and there might be some evidence that sways in that direction, but nothing is conclusive in the way you keep portraying it.

Furthermore, WHAT IS YOUR VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO WEAPONS DETECTORS since you keep dismissing them?

I would agree with bringing back SROs, consequences at school (not RJ), and common sense gun laws. And given the current climate none of this will happen

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

+1000

I'm baffled how anyone can say this. I bet you don't want SROs either. So no SROs, no metal detectors- just common-sense gun laws will do?
Can we take out the metal detectors at government buildings and airports then if all we need are common-sense gun laws?

First let's talk about whether metal detectors IN SCHOOLS are effective at preventing or deterring violence. Which they are not. They're not effective, and they're not cost-effective.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

We already have gun laws.

Heck, kids aren't supposed to be smoking weed at school - yet, the bathrooms are filled with weed, and fentanyl and other drugs.

We have drug laws, but those don't keep drugs out of our schools.

We have laws about bomb threats, but we now know that those don't apply to kids under the age of 13. So, we still had a rash of bomb threats in MCPS.

We have laws protecting kids from sexual assault, but we have rapes in our schools.

And so therefore we should just get rid of laws about drugs, bombs, and sexual assaults? Is that what you're saying? There are laws against murder, but people still murder, therefore we shouldn't have laws against murder?

DP.
It’s pointless to throw MORE laws around when the EXISTING laws aren’t followed or enforced. I’m all for gun control, but I’m also a realist. Do you think gun violence is always being committed by people who own the guns lawfully? If a person is willing to break the law, won’t they be willing to break one or two more? So fine… write all the gun laws you want. Then what? NOTHING will change without enforcement.

Someone upthread said we don’t need police in schools. We just need more gun laws. Again: how will that help? More laws and no enforcement?

When it comes down to reason and logic: the schools need security and the EXISTING rules enforced. Let’s start there.

No. No, it's not. No. That's like saying, "It's pointless to go buy MORE food when the EXISTING food hasn't been eaten."

You are not, actually, all for gun control.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We Don't need SROs or metal detectors. What we do need are common sense gun laws.

+1000

I'm baffled how anyone can say this. I bet you don't want SROs either. So no SROs, no metal detectors- just common-sense gun laws will do?
Can we take out the metal detectors at government buildings and airports then if all we need are common-sense gun laws?