Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Student activism drove much of the anti-SRO movement. Students of color say that they don't feel safe with SROs in the schools.

but maybe other kids feel safer with SROs, and certainly, the Principals wanted to keep the SROs.

It's a movement. People who like them come from a position of privilege, so their feelings of safety don't trump those students of color who are fearful of SROs and more likely that non-POC to be arrested. SROs are police and the argument is that police don't belong in schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Student activism drove much of the anti-SRO movement. Students of color say that they don't feel safe with SROs in the schools.

but maybe other kids feel safer with SROs, and certainly, the Principals wanted to keep the SROs.

Because the principals do not have the resources or knowledge do deal with behavior issues among students of color, they would rather use law enforcement.

Anonymous wrote:Student activism drove much of the anti-SRO movement. Students of color say that they don't feel safe with SROs in the schools.

but maybe other kids feel safer with SROs, and certainly, the Principals wanted to keep the SROs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Unfortunately, there are bad cops. Doesn't mean we should get rid of all cops. Also, if your son was threatened by someone with a knife, would you call a cop or not because he freezes up if a cop comes near him?

It definitely means we should get rid of bad cops, but it is apparently nearly impossible to do that. As the saying goes, "One bad apple spoils the whole barrel."

As for calling the cops for help - you may or may not be aware that many people who called the cops for help instead received harm from the cops who are sworn to serve and protect.

Specifically, MoCo cops have shot to death a young Black man having a mental health crisis after their parents called to get them help.

That's horrible. But, if I came across a black man who was threatening me, should I assume he has a mental crisis? Should I assume all black men are dangerous? No, right?

Likewise, I am not going to assume that all cops are bad.

Speaking of this type of situation, we had a situation in my area where the family called the cops on another family member who was having a mental breakdown. Several cops came with guns drawn. This has happened several times now. Some part of me is afraid of this person who has repeatedly has had a mental breakdown enough so that cops had to be called with their guns drawn.

But, going back to the topic of SROs in schools, I don't recall a single incident where a cop shot a student. But, if this student was having a mental breakdown and had a gun, and was behaving in a threatening manner, then I would hope that the cops would incapicitate the person in some way, whether that's with a taser or a gun.

Student activism drove much of the anti-SRO movement. Students of color say that they don't feel safe with SROs in the schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, this has nothing to do with what parents are concerned about in this thread. You can pursue this in another thread, I very much agree with you that it's an important issue and will help with trust in communities. But reforming the police has NOTHING to do with bullying and harassment of students (and teachers) in the classroom, so please don't try to change the subject and push your agenda. If it had something to do with it, the fact that the SROs are gone should have increased trust and consequently made behavior better in schools, but it seems to have had the opposite effect.

There's at least one poster on this thread who is extremely concerned about the removal of the SROs. And police accountability (or lack of it) is why the SROs were removed. It's impossible to have a serious discussion about the SROs without talking about police accountability (or lack of it).

Where is the evidence that there has been wide issues with SROs at MCPS? Literally the anti SROs seem to be ignoring the fact that at MCPS, only 3% of SROs initiate arrests. Please tell me how you can abolish the program knowing this data.

New poster just looking for info. The news articles I see on this say 460 students over the past 3 years total were arrested when SROs were in the schools. There were concerns because about 80% of the arrested kids were Black or Hispanic while only 53% of MCPS students are members of those groups.
So 460 kids over 3 years... with the possibility that a few were arrested more than once in those 3 yrs... in a county with, what, 170k students?
How many students have been arrested so far this year?
Have any SROs been accused of violence against a student?
Have any dangerous incidents ended more safely because of the presence of an officer?
If police were called almost as much in the one month of September to schools than they were in all of 2019-20, are kids safer without the SROs there? Are students having nearly as much negative interaction with the police as they normally would but without the protection that a full-time SRO might offer?
I see both sides of the argument. I think we have an issue nationwide with police not being trained correctly or enough, with some terrible, tragic outcomes, particularly for people who are minorities. I also think we need to look at local conditions to assess the issue here specifically, and I want my kids (including my Blair student) to be safe.

Anonymous wrote:

Again, this has nothing to do with what parents are concerned about in this thread. You can pursue this in another thread, I very much agree with you that it's an important issue and will help with trust in communities. But reforming the police has NOTHING to do with bullying and harassment of students (and teachers) in the classroom, so please don't try to change the subject and push your agenda. If it had something to do with it, the fact that the SROs are gone should have increased trust and consequently made behavior better in schools, but it seems to have had the opposite effect.

There's at least one poster on this thread who is extremely concerned about the removal of the SROs. And police accountability (or lack of it) is why the SROs were removed. It's impossible to have a serious discussion about the SROs without talking about police accountability (or lack of it).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Abolishing SROs in a blanket sweep is clearly worse overall than actually dealing with the problem, which is to have consequences for the bad SROs/cops who do abuse their power. We know that accountability has to be in place. Simply removing all SROs, the majority who are good and provide a public service, is just stupid.

OK, so, how's it going with accountability for bad cops?

I'm not seeing your argument. Everyone agrees that policies need to change to make them accountable. Does this mean we remove all SROs from schools? Your argument would then also imply we blanket remove our police system just because we know bad cops exist. Clearly, it doesn't make sense. What makes sense is to continue to push hard for accountability, for those who serve AND for schools to do their job and educate our children.

If everyone agrees, why isn't it happening?

Because of politics, obviously. Tell me how this issue is relevant to the subject of disruption in the classroom. The only relevance is if SROs are held accountable so that they can be brought back into the classroom, but it doesn't seem like that's what you want done. So if it isn't who will be able to control out of control classrooms when these things happen regularly?

No, you can't just hand-wave with "politics". "Politics" what? "Politics" who? Obviously some people do NOT agree that policies need to change.

Again, this has nothing to do with what parents are concerned about in this thread. You can pursue this in another thread, I very much agree with you that it's an important issue and will help with trust in communities. But reforming the police has NOTHING to do with bullying and harassment of students (and teachers) in the classroom, so please don't try to change the subject and push your agenda. If it had something to do with it, the fact that the SROs are gone should have increased trust and consequently made behavior better in schools, but it seems to have had the opposite effect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Unfortunately, there are bad cops. Doesn't mean we should get rid of all cops. Also, if your son was threatened by someone with a knife, would you call a cop or not because he freezes up if a cop comes near him?

It definitely means we should get rid of bad cops, but it is apparently nearly impossible to do that. As the saying goes, "One bad apple spoils the whole barrel."

As for calling the cops for help - you may or may not be aware that many people who called the cops for help instead received harm from the cops who are sworn to serve and protect.

Specifically, MoCo cops have shot to death a young Black man having a mental health crisis after their parents called to get them help.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not seeing your argument. Everyone agrees that policies need to change to make them accountable. Does this mean we remove all SROs from schools? Your argument would then also imply we blanket remove our police system just because we know bad cops exist. Clearly, it doesn't make sense. What makes sense is to continue to push hard for accountability, for those who serve AND for schools to do their job and educate our children.

That's the thing, though. The police have not initiated any changes, nor have they held bad cops accountable. They only choice left was to remove them from schools.

If MCPD had made a good faith effort to root out corruption, get bad cops off the streets, and discipline those who slip through, we would have better policy choices. But this is the policy choice left standing because the police will not govern themselves appropriately.

If they take steps to demonstrate that they can be trusted with our children, we can re-evaluate at that time.

Fine, so take SRO out, but who steps in to control the situation when someone is completely disrupting class? Many have been asking this on the thread, but I'm not seeing an answer. Where is the accountability here? Schools have to be empowered to hold themselves accountable, so that teachers can actually teach. Otherwise we will continue seeing an exodus and more will leave, and true learning in school will be an empty shell, almost fully reduced to babysitting services.

So, now we are speaking the language of abolition. If we can agree that the police have shown themselves unwilling or incapable of self-governance, and have lost the trust of the communities they claim to serve, then we can discuss what comes next. The conversation moves away from how to get cops back in schools and toward holding the County Council accountable for the commitments they made around non police intervention. I'm ready to have that conversation.

What County Council commitments are you referring to? Is this related specifically to schools or to the general community? I'm not sure why you are steering the discussion away from the issue at hand with schools and into a different issue of policing/reforming the police.

Here's what Elrich said when he announced he would remove SROs:

"“Our intention is to increase our support for our students, provide the flexibility of responses other than police officers, unless they are otherwise absolutely necessary,” he said."

So, we need those repsonses. The reason we are talking about policing/reforming the police is becuase the whole entire reason that police are not in schools is becuase they were unwilling to reform themselves. If police weren't abusing kids, or if the leadership took action against those who did, they would not have lost the trust of the community and would still be in schools.

The two issues can't be untangled.

And what have they done to protect our kids from threats inside of the schools? Not seeing any actions. All I see is sweeping incidences under the rug as to make it look like RJ is working. Newsflash: IT's NOT WORKING!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Abolishing SROs in a blanket sweep is clearly worse overall than actually dealing with the problem, which is to have consequences for the bad SROs/cops who do abuse their power. We know that accountability has to be in place. Simply removing all SROs, the majority who are good and provide a public service, is just stupid.

OK, so, how's it going with accountability for bad cops?

I'm not seeing your argument. Everyone agrees that policies need to change to make them accountable. Does this mean we remove all SROs from schools? Your argument would then also imply we blanket remove our police system just because we know bad cops exist. Clearly, it doesn't make sense. What makes sense is to continue to push hard for accountability, for those who serve AND for schools to do their job and educate our children.

If everyone agrees, why isn't it happening?

Because of politics, obviously. Tell me how this issue is relevant to the subject of disruption in the classroom. The only relevance is if SROs are held accountable so that they can be brought back into the classroom, but it doesn't seem like that's what you want done. So if it isn't who will be able to control out of control classrooms when these things happen regularly?

No, you can't just hand-wave with "politics". "Politics" what? "Politics" who? Obviously some people do NOT agree that policies need to change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not seeing your argument. Everyone agrees that policies need to change to make them accountable. Does this mean we remove all SROs from schools? Your argument would then also imply we blanket remove our police system just because we know bad cops exist. Clearly, it doesn't make sense. What makes sense is to continue to push hard for accountability, for those who serve AND for schools to do their job and educate our children.

That's the thing, though. The police have not initiated any changes, nor have they held bad cops accountable. They only choice left was to remove them from schools.

If MCPD had made a good faith effort to root out corruption, get bad cops off the streets, and discipline those who slip through, we would have better policy choices. But this is the policy choice left standing because the police will not govern themselves appropriately.

If they take steps to demonstrate that they can be trusted with our children, we can re-evaluate at that time.

Fine, so take SRO out, but who steps in to control the situation when someone is completely disrupting class? Many have been asking this on the thread, but I'm not seeing an answer. Where is the accountability here? Schools have to be empowered to hold themselves accountable, so that teachers can actually teach. Otherwise we will continue seeing an exodus and more will leave, and true learning in school will be an empty shell, almost fully reduced to babysitting services.

So, now we are speaking the language of abolition. If we can agree that the police have shown themselves unwilling or incapable of self-governance, and have lost the trust of the communities they claim to serve, then we can discuss what comes next. The conversation moves away from how to get cops back in schools and toward holding the County Council accountable for the commitments they made around non police intervention. I'm ready to have that conversation.

What County Council commitments are you referring to? Is this related specifically to schools or to the general community? I'm not sure why you are steering the discussion away from the issue at hand with schools and into a different issue of policing/reforming the police.

Here's what Elrich said when he announced he would remove SROs:

"“Our intention is to increase our support for our students, provide the flexibility of responses other than police officers, unless they are otherwise absolutely necessary,” he said."

So, we need those repsonses. The reason we are talking about policing/reforming the police is becuase the whole entire reason that police are not in schools is becuase they were unwilling to reform themselves. If police weren't abusing kids, or if the leadership took action against those who did, they would not have lost the trust of the community and would still be in schools.

The two issues can't be untangled.

Ok, but clearly police policing establishing laws, processes, and procedures to police themselves isn't something that will instantly happen, it takes time and smart politics to push for that. And frankly, that is not something schools can wait years for at the expense of teachers and students. So what can be done NOW to help with this? Since Erlich's quote had no answer whatsoever, who else can step up to handle these situations?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Abolishing SROs in a blanket sweep is clearly worse overall than actually dealing with the problem, which is to have consequences for the bad SROs/cops who do abuse their power. We know that accountability has to be in place. Simply removing all SROs, the majority who are good and provide a public service, is just stupid.

OK, so, how's it going with accountability for bad cops?

I'm not seeing your argument. Everyone agrees that policies need to change to make them accountable. Does this mean we remove all SROs from schools? Your argument would then also imply we blanket remove our police system just because we know bad cops exist. Clearly, it doesn't make sense. What makes sense is to continue to push hard for accountability, for those who serve AND for schools to do their job and educate our children.

If everyone agrees, why isn't it happening?

Because of politics, obviously. Tell me how this issue is relevant to the subject of disruption in the classroom. The only relevance is if SROs are held accountable so that they can be brought back into the classroom, but it doesn't seem like that's what you want done. So if it isn't who will be able to control out of control classrooms when these things happen regularly?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not seeing your argument. Everyone agrees that policies need to change to make them accountable. Does this mean we remove all SROs from schools? Your argument would then also imply we blanket remove our police system just because we know bad cops exist. Clearly, it doesn't make sense. What makes sense is to continue to push hard for accountability, for those who serve AND for schools to do their job and educate our children.

That's the thing, though. The police have not initiated any changes, nor have they held bad cops accountable. They only choice left was to remove them from schools.

If MCPD had made a good faith effort to root out corruption, get bad cops off the streets, and discipline those who slip through, we would have better policy choices. But this is the policy choice left standing because the police will not govern themselves appropriately.

If they take steps to demonstrate that they can be trusted with our children, we can re-evaluate at that time.

Fine, so take SRO out, but who steps in to control the situation when someone is completely disrupting class? Many have been asking this on the thread, but I'm not seeing an answer. Where is the accountability here? Schools have to be empowered to hold themselves accountable, so that teachers can actually teach. Otherwise we will continue seeing an exodus and more will leave, and true learning in school will be an empty shell, almost fully reduced to babysitting services.

So, now we are speaking the language of abolition. If we can agree that the police have shown themselves unwilling or incapable of self-governance, and have lost the trust of the communities they claim to serve, then we can discuss what comes next. The conversation moves away from how to get cops back in schools and toward holding the County Council accountable for the commitments they made around non police intervention. I'm ready to have that conversation.

What County Council commitments are you referring to? Is this related specifically to schools or to the general community? I'm not sure why you are steering the discussion away from the issue at hand with schools and into a different issue of policing/reforming the police.

Here's what Elrich said when he announced he would remove SROs:

"“Our intention is to increase our support for our students, provide the flexibility of responses other than police officers, unless they are otherwise absolutely necessary,” he said."

So, we need those repsonses. The reason we are talking about policing/reforming the police is becuase the whole entire reason that police are not in schools is becuase they were unwilling to reform themselves. If police weren't abusing kids, or if the leadership took action against those who did, they would not have lost the trust of the community and would still be in schools.

The two issues can't be untangled.