Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Office Amy at Churchill was an asset to the community. She was a Churchill grad this very vested in the school. I had many many opportunities to see her in action with the kids. She knew them all. She sought out the lonely and alone and was able to intervene with kids before things got bad because she knew them so well. I cannot speak for other SROs.

It was the same for most SROs in most HSs - they were an asset, and the Principals agree. I stand by my earlier statement: a vocal minority got rid of the SROs to the detromwnt of all

Anonymous wrote:I have an SRO at my school…only one person…but I support someone being armed in my building

Anonymous wrote:Office Amy at Churchill was an asset to the community. She was a Churchill grad this very vested in the school. I had many many opportunities to see her in action with the kids. She knew them all. She sought out the lonely and alone and was able to intervene with kids before things got bad because she knew them so well. I cannot speak for other SROs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think an SRO will protect my kid from a school shooter situation. But I think they are needed to deal with in school regular violence so that that does not fall to the teachers or other staff.

All the evidence suggests otherwise and SROs just make things worse.

So, again, then why do Principals want SROs in school? And it's not to absolve themselves of responsibility as a PP has already proven to be otherwise. The vast vast majority of the times when cops were called were initiated by the school admin. They clearly felt that whatever security they had was not adequate enough to deal with the situation.

Nothing MCPS has done has reduced the violence, either.

All the principals I know think it's a terrible idea. Where do you get the idea that they're for this?

You know the wrong principals. 25 out of 25 high school principals said they wanted SRO’s.

DP but do you really think a principal would publicly say they don't want SRO in their school? If one principal says they don't want SRO in the school and something happens, people would call for his/her head, guillotine style. It's a CYA move.

I doubt that was a concern at the time. The council’s rhetoric was very anti-SRO as they pushed that bill through. That was their accepted narrative. If anything, the principals showed courage by speaking for police presence in schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an SRO at my school…only one person…but I support someone being armed in my building

What do you expect them to do with a pistol v high capacity assault rifle?

It only takes on good shot to kill someone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an SRO at my school…only one person…but I support someone being armed in my building

What do you expect them to do with a pistol v high capacity assault rifle?

Anonymous wrote:I have an SRO at my school…only one person…but I support someone being armed in my building

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think an SRO will protect my kid from a school shooter situation. But I think they are needed to deal with in school regular violence so that that does not fall to the teachers or other staff.

All the evidence suggests otherwise and SROs just make things worse.

So, again, then why do Principals want SROs in school? And it's not to absolve themselves of responsibility as a PP has already proven to be otherwise. The vast vast majority of the times when cops were called were initiated by the school admin. They clearly felt that whatever security they had was not adequate enough to deal with the situation.

Nothing MCPS has done has reduced the violence, either.

All the principals I know think it's a terrible idea. Where do you get the idea that they're for this?

You know the wrong principals. 25 out of 25 high school principals said they wanted SRO’s.

DP but do you really think a principal would publicly say they don't want SRO in their school? If one principal says they don't want SRO in the school and something happens, people would call for his/her head, guillotine style. It's a CYA move.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think an SRO will protect my kid from a school shooter situation. But I think they are needed to deal with in school regular violence so that that does not fall to the teachers or other staff.

All the evidence suggests otherwise and SROs just make things worse.

So, again, then why do Principals want SROs in school? And it's not to absolve themselves of responsibility as a PP has already proven to be otherwise. The vast vast majority of the times when cops were called were initiated by the school admin. They clearly felt that whatever security they had was not adequate enough to deal with the situation.

Nothing MCPS has done has reduced the violence, either.

All the principals I know think it's a terrible idea. Where do you get the idea that they're for this?

You know the wrong principals. 25 out of 25 high school principals said they wanted SRO’s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

No that’s not it. My family is full of police and we don’t think armed guards should be in schools. It’s easy to imagine there is some boogie man out there hating on police because the alternate is understand that you are wrong and that does not feel good.

If you realized that there are some educated, thoughtful, police supporting people that know through their work and knowledge of how to secure schools and they know SROs don’t work and are harmful then you’d have to admit you’re just plain wrong and that sucks. So you next best option is to “other” the people you disagree with you to feel good about your stance.

Did you watch the video?

Yes, I watched the video. It simply wasn’t convincing. Neither is your statement above. I am very confident in my stance. 20 years in education has shown me time and time again why we need officers in school. I have the realistic, every-day evidence of their need.

What, specifically, is your “work and knowledge of how to secure schools” that you mention above? You claim that through your work you have seen that SROs aren’t the answer. Since this is apparently your area of expertise, can you explain to all of us what you are doing to fix that? I would rather not find another weapon in my classroom.

How many times has an SRO stopped a “weapon” from entering your classroom? Which weapon? The reality is you want to stop “weapons” from entering your classroom, but STOs don’t stop that,


I think what most teachers are worried about are fights.

Teacher here. Yes, I worry about fights… but not nearly as much as I do weapons. I’ve had several weapons in my room during my career, each handled by an SRO. You don’t forget that fear. What would I have done if I didn’t have an SRO to call on for support? Who would have removed them? Me, with zero training? Therefore, the SROs helped me 100% of the time I knew I had a weapon near me. As for how many they stopped? Great question. I’m confident that there are weapons that never made it into my room because of their efforts. The truth is, someone on DCUM isn’t going to change my mind. I work in schools. I’ve worked with SROs. I’ve personally seen their great worth. I want my own children and my students to have every support available to them. Period.

I've taught for 30 years and never had this happen. Are you sure you teach in MCPS in not in a GOP-inspired alternate reality?

Typical DCUM response - “never happened to me, therefore it couldn’t have possibly happened to anyone else.”

Even the teacher that it happened to admitted an armed police offer was not needed to resolve the situation.

Perhaps it isn’t the gun that made the difference. It was the SRO’s presence, experience, and training. Who else in the school would have that? Who else could handle these situations? You keep saying a person without a gun, but who would that be? Should we train administrators to disarm students?

You can easily train people that are not police officers.

No not an admin. A person trained and educated to do this specific job. Most peoples who have personal security do not use cops. There are security personnel that would be much better at this job, not a rent a cop.

It’s a specialized job in security that could get waaaaayyyyy more training than 40 hours. It’s a combination psychology, counseling, criminal justice, security.

Look at the STAR program in Colorado but for schools.

It’s not a 1 prong approach it’s a team approach. It would have counselors, mental health professionals, homelessness experts, etc.

It’s not something that can be explained in a post.

So you would like somebody who has similar training as an officer but isn’t an officer. (Note that an SRO also has far more hours than 40. They had to go through the academy and field training, after all.) It seems to me you want all the functions of a police officer just without the uniform and the gun.

The fact you referred to real officers as “rent a cops” tells me what I need to know. Your posts are nothing more than a reflection of an anti-police stance. What others have suggested on this thread IS a team approach, with counselors, mental health professionals, etc. It would simply include SROs as part of that team. While dangerous incidents in MCPS continue to increase in number, it’s going to be hard for anybody to justify removing SROs from the community.

No I would like somebody will similar training as to a counselor/social worker/educator, they can be trained to handle discipline. They should not have a gun, arrest powers, and they must be bound to not gossip/talk -about/ spread stories about students like teachers, unless under oath or as part of an investigation,

Actually the academy training and field training is most of the problem with police. You can’t reprogram that training out of your brain once you have had it. You also can’t deprogram what happens to a cop on the street after 5-10 years before they become an SRO. Those experiences make coos unqualified to work with children.

Go in a ride along one Saturday night educate yourself.

Also, Read “I love a cop” to understand why.

No I referred to security guards as rent a cops.

Yes the team approach involves cops, not SROs who would be called in .0001% of the time when a violent crime is being committed. They are not in the school day to day, they are outside the school stopping things before they get there (unlike Tx) and responding quickly when they are rarely needed.

Look at the star program in Colorado.

I am not anti police, I am police.

I am a teacher married to a police officer. I know several SROs very well through my time in schools. I have done multiple ride-alongs because of my husband’s job. I have read “I Love a Cop”. In fact, the department gave a copy to spouses.

I want SROs. The training and time on the street does NOT negate their ability to work within a school, as evidenced by the ones I have worked with. Once you have witnessed how a good one becomes a part of the school community, you simply can’t understand why you would voluntarily take that resource away from students.

So you H has never seen a cop do something inappropriate on the job, never?

What an odd question. That isn’t the subject of our current conversation, nor can you infer that based on what I wrote above. The question at hand is whether we should have SROs, not whether cops are perfect. Of course they aren’t. Neither are teachers, for that matter. Teachers regularly make the news for inappropriate relationships with students. Should we, by your logic, keep all teachers out of school buildings because some have been proven to be wrong for the job?

So your own h has witnessed inappropriate behavior by a fellow officer? Or not? You say they aren’t perfect so he has?

I am 100% sure if a teacher had witnessed child abuser they would turn the teacher in. But cops, no, never, they can’t. They won’t get back up. I’m also 109% sure your amazing h never copped to being with a bad cop and not turning them in.

So tell me all about the wonderful things your H tells you about SROs.

How about do a “ride along” in internal affairs, because if you haven’t seen the brutality of police officers on a ride along, your h is protecting you from the truth.

Since you read I love a cop … what is the 2nd stage of being a cop? It’s the “everybody is a criminal” stage “nobody is a victim”.

Since your such an expert explain that stage to the ladies and gentlemen in the audience,

What is your solution? How about you as a parent/adult volunteer to provide security since you can do it better.

I would gladly put a security plan together for MCPS, but they don’t want a solution, they want a bandaid. A solution is expensive. Be thankful our gun control laws are not only well written but well policed. Some area have laws but never enforce them, but MD does enforce them.

The ghost gun issue is a problem right now.

Gun control is not going to solve this and MCPS cannot do gun control so the issue is what can MCPS do. They an bring in more security.

Why do we need people with guns in school?

We don’t it’s inane.

Even the teacher who is pro-SRO admitted that a gun was never needed to help in MCPS

I am that poster, and that is clearly not what I said. The fact an SRO didn’t use his gun to disarm the students at my high school doesn’t mean that the SRO himself wasn’t needed. Certain posters continue to diminish an SRO’s worth by referring only to his gun. They are actually integral members of a school community and they bring considerable knowledge and expertise, but you already have heard this and have decided to ignore reality.

You may continue to manipulate and twist people’s words on this thread. It does nothing to help your argument.

You admitted the gun is not needed for the work that an SRO does. So literally anybody can be trained to do the job they do not have to be a police officer that is carrying a gun. What do you thinking do you think police officers come from another planet they can’t be just normal human beings. You sound like one of those people that didn’t think women would be able to handle being a cop.

We can train normal people to do it SRO’s do without a gun or police powers Or the need and desire to interrogate minors without their parents present

I am done with this thread. I did not “admit” anything. No, “literally anybody” can’t do what they do. I work in schools. We have the same problems that we find in all of society: weapons, assaults, etc. Society needs police to handle this. Schools are small societies. You’ll find many of us who work directly in schools want help on site.

Of course police are human beings and of course they can be women. Your fabrications aren’t convincing at all. Honestly, they are quite sophomoric.

How many times was a weapon draws to take the numerous weapons out of your classroom, in your 20 years experience as a devout cop wife and teacher?

The fact SROs I witnessed didn’t use their guns is a testament to their training. They are able to resolve conflicts without escalation. Isn’t that what we want?
Signed - somebody who doesn’t take “devoted cop wife and teacher” as the insult you intended it to be

Yes we want people without guns resolving these issues without a gun or police powers. That’s exactly what we want, and cops are not the only people on the planet that can learn how to do that.

- you should sign love is blind because you admitted cops do horrible things (they are human) but they are still “honorable” even if they see it and don’t report it to internal affairs, like your h

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

No that’s not it. My family is full of police and we don’t think armed guards should be in schools. It’s easy to imagine there is some boogie man out there hating on police because the alternate is understand that you are wrong and that does not feel good.

If you realized that there are some educated, thoughtful, police supporting people that know through their work and knowledge of how to secure schools and they know SROs don’t work and are harmful then you’d have to admit you’re just plain wrong and that sucks. So you next best option is to “other” the people you disagree with you to feel good about your stance.

Did you watch the video?

Yes, I watched the video. It simply wasn’t convincing. Neither is your statement above. I am very confident in my stance. 20 years in education has shown me time and time again why we need officers in school. I have the realistic, every-day evidence of their need.

What, specifically, is your “work and knowledge of how to secure schools” that you mention above? You claim that through your work you have seen that SROs aren’t the answer. Since this is apparently your area of expertise, can you explain to all of us what you are doing to fix that? I would rather not find another weapon in my classroom.

How many times has an SRO stopped a “weapon” from entering your classroom? Which weapon? The reality is you want to stop “weapons” from entering your classroom, but STOs don’t stop that,


I think what most teachers are worried about are fights.

Teacher here. Yes, I worry about fights… but not nearly as much as I do weapons. I’ve had several weapons in my room during my career, each handled by an SRO. You don’t forget that fear. What would I have done if I didn’t have an SRO to call on for support? Who would have removed them? Me, with zero training? Therefore, the SROs helped me 100% of the time I knew I had a weapon near me. As for how many they stopped? Great question. I’m confident that there are weapons that never made it into my room because of their efforts. The truth is, someone on DCUM isn’t going to change my mind. I work in schools. I’ve worked with SROs. I’ve personally seen their great worth. I want my own children and my students to have every support available to them. Period.

I've taught for 30 years and never had this happen. Are you sure you teach in MCPS in not in a GOP-inspired alternate reality?

Typical DCUM response - “never happened to me, therefore it couldn’t have possibly happened to anyone else.”

Even the teacher that it happened to admitted an armed police offer was not needed to resolve the situation.

Perhaps it isn’t the gun that made the difference. It was the SRO’s presence, experience, and training. Who else in the school would have that? Who else could handle these situations? You keep saying a person without a gun, but who would that be? Should we train administrators to disarm students?

You can easily train people that are not police officers.

No not an admin. A person trained and educated to do this specific job. Most peoples who have personal security do not use cops. There are security personnel that would be much better at this job, not a rent a cop.

It’s a specialized job in security that could get waaaaayyyyy more training than 40 hours. It’s a combination psychology, counseling, criminal justice, security.

Look at the STAR program in Colorado but for schools.

It’s not a 1 prong approach it’s a team approach. It would have counselors, mental health professionals, homelessness experts, etc.

It’s not something that can be explained in a post.

So you would like somebody who has similar training as an officer but isn’t an officer. (Note that an SRO also has far more hours than 40. They had to go through the academy and field training, after all.) It seems to me you want all the functions of a police officer just without the uniform and the gun.

The fact you referred to real officers as “rent a cops” tells me what I need to know. Your posts are nothing more than a reflection of an anti-police stance. What others have suggested on this thread IS a team approach, with counselors, mental health professionals, etc. It would simply include SROs as part of that team. While dangerous incidents in MCPS continue to increase in number, it’s going to be hard for anybody to justify removing SROs from the community.

No I would like somebody will similar training as to a counselor/social worker/educator, they can be trained to handle discipline. They should not have a gun, arrest powers, and they must be bound to not gossip/talk -about/ spread stories about students like teachers, unless under oath or as part of an investigation,

Actually the academy training and field training is most of the problem with police. You can’t reprogram that training out of your brain once you have had it. You also can’t deprogram what happens to a cop on the street after 5-10 years before they become an SRO. Those experiences make coos unqualified to work with children.

Go in a ride along one Saturday night educate yourself.

Also, Read “I love a cop” to understand why.

No I referred to security guards as rent a cops.

Yes the team approach involves cops, not SROs who would be called in .0001% of the time when a violent crime is being committed. They are not in the school day to day, they are outside the school stopping things before they get there (unlike Tx) and responding quickly when they are rarely needed.

Look at the star program in Colorado.

I am not anti police, I am police.

I am a teacher married to a police officer. I know several SROs very well through my time in schools. I have done multiple ride-alongs because of my husband’s job. I have read “I Love a Cop”. In fact, the department gave a copy to spouses.

I want SROs. The training and time on the street does NOT negate their ability to work within a school, as evidenced by the ones I have worked with. Once you have witnessed how a good one becomes a part of the school community, you simply can’t understand why you would voluntarily take that resource away from students.

So you H has never seen a cop do something inappropriate on the job, never?

What an odd question. That isn’t the subject of our current conversation, nor can you infer that based on what I wrote above. The question at hand is whether we should have SROs, not whether cops are perfect. Of course they aren’t. Neither are teachers, for that matter. Teachers regularly make the news for inappropriate relationships with students. Should we, by your logic, keep all teachers out of school buildings because some have been proven to be wrong for the job?

So your own h has witnessed inappropriate behavior by a fellow officer? Or not? You say they aren’t perfect so he has?

I am 100% sure if a teacher had witnessed child abuser they would turn the teacher in. But cops, no, never, they can’t. They won’t get back up. I’m also 109% sure your amazing h never copped to being with a bad cop and not turning them in.

So tell me all about the wonderful things your H tells you about SROs.

How about do a “ride along” in internal affairs, because if you haven’t seen the brutality of police officers on a ride along, your h is protecting you from the truth.

Since you read I love a cop … what is the 2nd stage of being a cop? It’s the “everybody is a criminal” stage “nobody is a victim”.

Since your such an expert explain that stage to the ladies and gentlemen in the audience,

What is your solution? How about you as a parent/adult volunteer to provide security since you can do it better.

I would gladly put a security plan together for MCPS, but they don’t want a solution, they want a bandaid. A solution is expensive. Be thankful our gun control laws are not only well written but well policed. Some area have laws but never enforce them, but MD does enforce them.

The ghost gun issue is a problem right now.

Gun control is not going to solve this and MCPS cannot do gun control so the issue is what can MCPS do. They an bring in more security.

Why do we need people with guns in school?

We don’t it’s inane.

Even the teacher who is pro-SRO admitted that a gun was never needed to help in MCPS

I am that poster, and that is clearly not what I said. The fact an SRO didn’t use his gun to disarm the students at my high school doesn’t mean that the SRO himself wasn’t needed. Certain posters continue to diminish an SRO’s worth by referring only to his gun. They are actually integral members of a school community and they bring considerable knowledge and expertise, but you already have heard this and have decided to ignore reality.

You may continue to manipulate and twist people’s words on this thread. It does nothing to help your argument.

You admitted the gun is not needed for the work that an SRO does. So literally anybody can be trained to do the job they do not have to be a police officer that is carrying a gun. What do you thinking do you think police officers come from another planet they can’t be just normal human beings. You sound like one of those people that didn’t think women would be able to handle being a cop.

We can train normal people to do it SRO’s do without a gun or police powers Or the need and desire to interrogate minors without their parents present

I am done with this thread. I did not “admit” anything. No, “literally anybody” can’t do what they do. I work in schools. We have the same problems that we find in all of society: weapons, assaults, etc. Society needs police to handle this. Schools are small societies. You’ll find many of us who work directly in schools want help on site.

Of course police are human beings and of course they can be women. Your fabrications aren’t convincing at all. Honestly, they are quite sophomoric.

How many times was a weapon draws to take the numerous weapons out of your classroom, in your 20 years experience as a devout cop wife and teacher?

The fact SROs I witnessed didn’t use their guns is a testament to their training. They are able to resolve conflicts without escalation. Isn’t that what we want?
Signed - somebody who doesn’t take “devoted cop wife and teacher” as the insult you intended it to be

Yes we want people without guns resolving these issues without a gun or police powers. That’s exactly what we want, and cops are not the only people on the planet that can learn how to do that.

- you should sign love is blind because you admitted cops do horrible things (they are human) but they are still “honorable” even if they see it and don’t report it to internal affairs, like your h

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

No that’s not it. My family is full of police and we don’t think armed guards should be in schools. It’s easy to imagine there is some boogie man out there hating on police because the alternate is understand that you are wrong and that does not feel good.

If you realized that there are some educated, thoughtful, police supporting people that know through their work and knowledge of how to secure schools and they know SROs don’t work and are harmful then you’d have to admit you’re just plain wrong and that sucks. So you next best option is to “other” the people you disagree with you to feel good about your stance.

Did you watch the video?

Yes, I watched the video. It simply wasn’t convincing. Neither is your statement above. I am very confident in my stance. 20 years in education has shown me time and time again why we need officers in school. I have the realistic, every-day evidence of their need.

What, specifically, is your “work and knowledge of how to secure schools” that you mention above? You claim that through your work you have seen that SROs aren’t the answer. Since this is apparently your area of expertise, can you explain to all of us what you are doing to fix that? I would rather not find another weapon in my classroom.

How many times has an SRO stopped a “weapon” from entering your classroom? Which weapon? The reality is you want to stop “weapons” from entering your classroom, but STOs don’t stop that,


I think what most teachers are worried about are fights.

Teacher here. Yes, I worry about fights… but not nearly as much as I do weapons. I’ve had several weapons in my room during my career, each handled by an SRO. You don’t forget that fear. What would I have done if I didn’t have an SRO to call on for support? Who would have removed them? Me, with zero training? Therefore, the SROs helped me 100% of the time I knew I had a weapon near me. As for how many they stopped? Great question. I’m confident that there are weapons that never made it into my room because of their efforts. The truth is, someone on DCUM isn’t going to change my mind. I work in schools. I’ve worked with SROs. I’ve personally seen their great worth. I want my own children and my students to have every support available to them. Period.

I've taught for 30 years and never had this happen. Are you sure you teach in MCPS in not in a GOP-inspired alternate reality?

Typical DCUM response - “never happened to me, therefore it couldn’t have possibly happened to anyone else.”

Even the teacher that it happened to admitted an armed police offer was not needed to resolve the situation.

Perhaps it isn’t the gun that made the difference. It was the SRO’s presence, experience, and training. Who else in the school would have that? Who else could handle these situations? You keep saying a person without a gun, but who would that be? Should we train administrators to disarm students?

You can easily train people that are not police officers.

No not an admin. A person trained and educated to do this specific job. Most peoples who have personal security do not use cops. There are security personnel that would be much better at this job, not a rent a cop.

It’s a specialized job in security that could get waaaaayyyyy more training than 40 hours. It’s a combination psychology, counseling, criminal justice, security.

Look at the STAR program in Colorado but for schools.

It’s not a 1 prong approach it’s a team approach. It would have counselors, mental health professionals, homelessness experts, etc.

It’s not something that can be explained in a post.

So you would like somebody who has similar training as an officer but isn’t an officer. (Note that an SRO also has far more hours than 40. They had to go through the academy and field training, after all.) It seems to me you want all the functions of a police officer just without the uniform and the gun.

The fact you referred to real officers as “rent a cops” tells me what I need to know. Your posts are nothing more than a reflection of an anti-police stance. What others have suggested on this thread IS a team approach, with counselors, mental health professionals, etc. It would simply include SROs as part of that team. While dangerous incidents in MCPS continue to increase in number, it’s going to be hard for anybody to justify removing SROs from the community.

No I would like somebody will similar training as to a counselor/social worker/educator, they can be trained to handle discipline. They should not have a gun, arrest powers, and they must be bound to not gossip/talk -about/ spread stories about students like teachers, unless under oath or as part of an investigation,

Actually the academy training and field training is most of the problem with police. You can’t reprogram that training out of your brain once you have had it. You also can’t deprogram what happens to a cop on the street after 5-10 years before they become an SRO. Those experiences make coos unqualified to work with children.

Go in a ride along one Saturday night educate yourself.

Also, Read “I love a cop” to understand why.

No I referred to security guards as rent a cops.

Yes the team approach involves cops, not SROs who would be called in .0001% of the time when a violent crime is being committed. They are not in the school day to day, they are outside the school stopping things before they get there (unlike Tx) and responding quickly when they are rarely needed.

Look at the star program in Colorado.

I am not anti police, I am police.

I am a teacher married to a police officer. I know several SROs very well through my time in schools. I have done multiple ride-alongs because of my husband’s job. I have read “I Love a Cop”. In fact, the department gave a copy to spouses.

I want SROs. The training and time on the street does NOT negate their ability to work within a school, as evidenced by the ones I have worked with. Once you have witnessed how a good one becomes a part of the school community, you simply can’t understand why you would voluntarily take that resource away from students.

So you H has never seen a cop do something inappropriate on the job, never?

What an odd question. That isn’t the subject of our current conversation, nor can you infer that based on what I wrote above. The question at hand is whether we should have SROs, not whether cops are perfect. Of course they aren’t. Neither are teachers, for that matter. Teachers regularly make the news for inappropriate relationships with students. Should we, by your logic, keep all teachers out of school buildings because some have been proven to be wrong for the job?

So your own h has witnessed inappropriate behavior by a fellow officer? Or not? You say they aren’t perfect so he has?

I am 100% sure if a teacher had witnessed child abuser they would turn the teacher in. But cops, no, never, they can’t. They won’t get back up. I’m also 109% sure your amazing h never copped to being with a bad cop and not turning them in.

So tell me all about the wonderful things your H tells you about SROs.

How about do a “ride along” in internal affairs, because if you haven’t seen the brutality of police officers on a ride along, your h is protecting you from the truth.

Since you read I love a cop … what is the 2nd stage of being a cop? It’s the “everybody is a criminal” stage “nobody is a victim”.

Since your such an expert explain that stage to the ladies and gentlemen in the audience,

What is your solution? How about you as a parent/adult volunteer to provide security since you can do it better.

I would gladly put a security plan together for MCPS, but they don’t want a solution, they want a bandaid. A solution is expensive. Be thankful our gun control laws are not only well written but well policed. Some area have laws but never enforce them, but MD does enforce them.

The ghost gun issue is a problem right now.

Gun control is not going to solve this and MCPS cannot do gun control so the issue is what can MCPS do. They an bring in more security.

Why do we need people with guns in school?

We don’t it’s inane.

Even the teacher who is pro-SRO admitted that a gun was never needed to help in MCPS

I am that poster, and that is clearly not what I said. The fact an SRO didn’t use his gun to disarm the students at my high school doesn’t mean that the SRO himself wasn’t needed. Certain posters continue to diminish an SRO’s worth by referring only to his gun. They are actually integral members of a school community and they bring considerable knowledge and expertise, but you already have heard this and have decided to ignore reality.

You may continue to manipulate and twist people’s words on this thread. It does nothing to help your argument.

You admitted the gun is not needed for the work that an SRO does. So literally anybody can be trained to do the job they do not have to be a police officer that is carrying a gun. What do you thinking do you think police officers come from another planet they can’t be just normal human beings. You sound like one of those people that didn’t think women would be able to handle being a cop.

We can train normal people to do it SRO’s do without a gun or police powers Or the need and desire to interrogate minors without their parents present

I am done with this thread. I did not “admit” anything. No, “literally anybody” can’t do what they do. I work in schools. We have the same problems that we find in all of society: weapons, assaults, etc. Society needs police to handle this. Schools are small societies. You’ll find many of us who work directly in schools want help on site.

Of course police are human beings and of course they can be women. Your fabrications aren’t convincing at all. Honestly, they are quite sophomoric.

How many times was a weapon draws to take the numerous weapons out of your classroom, in your 20 years experience as a devout cop wife and teacher?

The fact SROs I witnessed didn’t use their guns is a testament to their training. They are able to resolve conflicts without escalation. Isn’t that what we want?
Signed - somebody who doesn’t take “devoted cop wife and teacher” as the insult you intended it to be

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:fast track to a bunch of poor kids getting charges when they act ignorantly (they will) in combustible situations when they try to emasculate the bottom feeder police officers who are stuck on school duty. There will be way more of that than any heroics during the almost non-existent mass shooting events. While the cops at richer schools will just get really good are what ever game they have on their phone at the time.

1- Cops stuck on school duty will almost always be idiots looking for a low stress units / stuck there to be out of a leaders hair / late career waifs riding out the clock.
2- Most cops don't have the ego to let kids be idiots esp the type of cop that a unit is so willing to release form critical roles inside the precinct
3- most cops aren't dirty harry and won't be either willing or effective in a mass shooting event.

For it to go completely right you would need a great cop in the right spot and the right time after wasting so many resources. The harm day to day couple to the cost make it seem like a bad idea to me.

Stop blaming poor kids...stop making it should like all cops are bad when there are bad people in every profession.

So, put your kids at rich schools .... problem solved for you.

What is your solution? Zero security... clearly not a good plan

+1 status quo is not working. Violence has gone up. We need to do something. There is a new MOU with the police -- "Community Engagement Officer", which oeprates slightly differently than the previous SRO model. I think it's a good compromise.

Haven't you noticed the anti-security/police refuse to come up with another safety solution when asked. I want police/security at the school...

I agree with the PP who said the type cops that would help with a school shooting are not the type you would get working in schools. That leaves us with people using police powers on students which rarely leave the students in a better place. Stopping shooters is just about too late once they are armed. The only real solution is disarming them. If we can’t do that, public shooting is the price we will pay to have so many guns out there. Hammers going to hammer

SROs have to go through additional training and have additional oversight. Lazy cops aren’t going to pick that detail. I also don’t believe your average SRO goes into it to “use police powers on students.”

I’ve worked with four different SROs. Each was very invested in the school community, getting to know the students. They were true assets and helped contribute to positive police/community relationships. I never saw one abuse their authority. I posted last year that one of our SROs regularly came off-duty to student games and performances, just to show support. I was told by a poster on this board that the real reason was that he was there to spy and look for reasons to ruin kids’ lives. That’s the problem with this debate. Some posters just want to vilify police officers and they will always assume ill-intent, even when it isn’t warranted and isn’t backed up by anything other than hate.

40 hours of training.

Yes, that is what lazy cops do or ones they don’t trust on the street.

The problem is you want to generalize to all SROs the limited positive anecdotal interaction you had to a whole group of people.

I respect some police. I even respect some SROs but they are ill equipped to do the job at hand.

I have had many interactions with SROs. I am left wondering whether posters against SROs have had any interactions with them at all. Presumably you have had experience that leads you to say they are “ill equipped” to provide safety to a school environment?

Also, if you believe the police are ill-equipped to support a safe learning environment, then who should be expected to do it? That question has been asked over and over on this thread. Teachers are not trained to handle the safety concerns that unfortunately plague schools. Counselors aren’t, either. Teachers and counselors can try to thwart the problems, with the limited time and resources they have, but when that fails? What then? I have yet to see a response.

I'm pretty convinced that people who are anti-SROs don't have kids at schools where there are regular fights, bullying, and violence. My kids go to one of these schools and yes, I want SROs back so that they can mitigate and break up these fights. Until your kid attends one of these schools, you have no idea how disruptive and terrible this environment can be. MCPS has done NOTHING to stop this. The teachers and admin who are not equipped to deal with them are unfairly being put in situations that they're not equipped to handle nor have they signed up for. Why should a math teacher get in the middle of a fight and risk their safety? How is MCPS supposed to address this without SROs?

Oh no it's the exact opposite. No parent would want their kids around a gun toting fascist.

And you are clearly uneducated on how SROs worked at MCPS. Please respond to my question though. Who is responsible for breaking up physical and violent fights? For when a kid throws a chair across the classroom? The other day at my kid's school, a student and her girlfriend literally beat a kid down so badly that one could no longer recognize his bloody face and when a teacher tried to stop the situation, she too got hit. This is just one common example of a fight that happens at our school pretty much on a daily basis. It's so bad that even my child wants to move. So tell me again why we can't have SROs? Must be nice not to have a child at a school where these situations happen regularly.

There is some kind of deep, twisted pathology in this county that hates police so much, they are willing to sacrifice county residents to violence, death, and disability.

No that’s not it. My family is full of police and we don’t think armed guards should be in schools. It’s easy to imagine there is some boogie man out there hating on police because the alternate is understand that you are wrong and that does not feel good.

If you realized that there are some educated, thoughtful, police supporting people that know through their work and knowledge of how to secure schools and they know SROs don’t work and are harmful then you’d have to admit you’re just plain wrong and that sucks. So you next best option is to “other” the people you disagree with you to feel good about your stance.

Did you watch the video?

Yes, I watched the video. It simply wasn’t convincing. Neither is your statement above. I am very confident in my stance. 20 years in education has shown me time and time again why we need officers in school. I have the realistic, every-day evidence of their need.

What, specifically, is your “work and knowledge of how to secure schools” that you mention above? You claim that through your work you have seen that SROs aren’t the answer. Since this is apparently your area of expertise, can you explain to all of us what you are doing to fix that? I would rather not find another weapon in my classroom.

How many times has an SRO stopped a “weapon” from entering your classroom? Which weapon? The reality is you want to stop “weapons” from entering your classroom, but STOs don’t stop that,


I think what most teachers are worried about are fights.

Teacher here. Yes, I worry about fights… but not nearly as much as I do weapons. I’ve had several weapons in my room during my career, each handled by an SRO. You don’t forget that fear. What would I have done if I didn’t have an SRO to call on for support? Who would have removed them? Me, with zero training? Therefore, the SROs helped me 100% of the time I knew I had a weapon near me. As for how many they stopped? Great question. I’m confident that there are weapons that never made it into my room because of their efforts. The truth is, someone on DCUM isn’t going to change my mind. I work in schools. I’ve worked with SROs. I’ve personally seen their great worth. I want my own children and my students to have every support available to them. Period.

I've taught for 30 years and never had this happen. Are you sure you teach in MCPS in not in a GOP-inspired alternate reality?

Typical DCUM response - “never happened to me, therefore it couldn’t have possibly happened to anyone else.”

Even the teacher that it happened to admitted an armed police offer was not needed to resolve the situation.

Perhaps it isn’t the gun that made the difference. It was the SRO’s presence, experience, and training. Who else in the school would have that? Who else could handle these situations? You keep saying a person without a gun, but who would that be? Should we train administrators to disarm students?

You can easily train people that are not police officers.

No not an admin. A person trained and educated to do this specific job. Most peoples who have personal security do not use cops. There are security personnel that would be much better at this job, not a rent a cop.

It’s a specialized job in security that could get waaaaayyyyy more training than 40 hours. It’s a combination psychology, counseling, criminal justice, security.

Look at the STAR program in Colorado but for schools.

It’s not a 1 prong approach it’s a team approach. It would have counselors, mental health professionals, homelessness experts, etc.

It’s not something that can be explained in a post.

So you would like somebody who has similar training as an officer but isn’t an officer. (Note that an SRO also has far more hours than 40. They had to go through the academy and field training, after all.) It seems to me you want all the functions of a police officer just without the uniform and the gun.

The fact you referred to real officers as “rent a cops” tells me what I need to know. Your posts are nothing more than a reflection of an anti-police stance. What others have suggested on this thread IS a team approach, with counselors, mental health professionals, etc. It would simply include SROs as part of that team. While dangerous incidents in MCPS continue to increase in number, it’s going to be hard for anybody to justify removing SROs from the community.

No I would like somebody will similar training as to a counselor/social worker/educator, they can be trained to handle discipline. They should not have a gun, arrest powers, and they must be bound to not gossip/talk -about/ spread stories about students like teachers, unless under oath or as part of an investigation,

Actually the academy training and field training is most of the problem with police. You can’t reprogram that training out of your brain once you have had it. You also can’t deprogram what happens to a cop on the street after 5-10 years before they become an SRO. Those experiences make coos unqualified to work with children.

Go in a ride along one Saturday night educate yourself.

Also, Read “I love a cop” to understand why.

No I referred to security guards as rent a cops.

Yes the team approach involves cops, not SROs who would be called in .0001% of the time when a violent crime is being committed. They are not in the school day to day, they are outside the school stopping things before they get there (unlike Tx) and responding quickly when they are rarely needed.

Look at the star program in Colorado.

I am not anti police, I am police.

I am a teacher married to a police officer. I know several SROs very well through my time in schools. I have done multiple ride-alongs because of my husband’s job. I have read “I Love a Cop”. In fact, the department gave a copy to spouses.

I want SROs. The training and time on the street does NOT negate their ability to work within a school, as evidenced by the ones I have worked with. Once you have witnessed how a good one becomes a part of the school community, you simply can’t understand why you would voluntarily take that resource away from students.

So you H has never seen a cop do something inappropriate on the job, never?

What an odd question. That isn’t the subject of our current conversation, nor can you infer that based on what I wrote above. The question at hand is whether we should have SROs, not whether cops are perfect. Of course they aren’t. Neither are teachers, for that matter. Teachers regularly make the news for inappropriate relationships with students. Should we, by your logic, keep all teachers out of school buildings because some have been proven to be wrong for the job?

So your own h has witnessed inappropriate behavior by a fellow officer? Or not? You say they aren’t perfect so he has?

I am 100% sure if a teacher had witnessed child abuser they would turn the teacher in. But cops, no, never, they can’t. They won’t get back up. I’m also 109% sure your amazing h never copped to being with a bad cop and not turning them in.

So tell me all about the wonderful things your H tells you about SROs.

How about do a “ride along” in internal affairs, because if you haven’t seen the brutality of police officers on a ride along, your h is protecting you from the truth.

Since you read I love a cop … what is the 2nd stage of being a cop? It’s the “everybody is a criminal” stage “nobody is a victim”.

Since your such an expert explain that stage to the ladies and gentlemen in the audience,

What is your solution? How about you as a parent/adult volunteer to provide security since you can do it better.

I would gladly put a security plan together for MCPS, but they don’t want a solution, they want a bandaid. A solution is expensive. Be thankful our gun control laws are not only well written but well policed. Some area have laws but never enforce them, but MD does enforce them.

The ghost gun issue is a problem right now.

Gun control is not going to solve this and MCPS cannot do gun control so the issue is what can MCPS do. They an bring in more security.

Why do we need people with guns in school?

We don’t it’s inane.

Even the teacher who is pro-SRO admitted that a gun was never needed to help in MCPS

I am that poster, and that is clearly not what I said. The fact an SRO didn’t use his gun to disarm the students at my high school doesn’t mean that the SRO himself wasn’t needed. Certain posters continue to diminish an SRO’s worth by referring only to his gun. They are actually integral members of a school community and they bring considerable knowledge and expertise, but you already have heard this and have decided to ignore reality.

You may continue to manipulate and twist people’s words on this thread. It does nothing to help your argument.

You admitted the gun is not needed for the work that an SRO does. So literally anybody can be trained to do the job they do not have to be a police officer that is carrying a gun. What do you thinking do you think police officers come from another planet they can’t be just normal human beings. You sound like one of those people that didn’t think women would be able to handle being a cop.

We can train normal people to do it SRO’s do without a gun or police powers Or the need and desire to interrogate minors without their parents present

I am done with this thread. I did not “admit” anything. No, “literally anybody” can’t do what they do. I work in schools. We have the same problems that we find in all of society: weapons, assaults, etc. Society needs police to handle this. Schools are small societies. You’ll find many of us who work directly in schools want help on site.

Of course police are human beings and of course they can be women. Your fabrications aren’t convincing at all. Honestly, they are quite sophomoric.

How many times was a weapon draws to take the numerous weapons out of your classroom, in your 20 years experience as a devout cop wife and teacher?

The fact SROs I witnessed didn’t use their guns is a testament to their training. They are able to resolve conflicts without escalation. Isn’t that what we want?
Signed - somebody who doesn’t take “devoted cop wife and teacher” as the insult you intended it to be