Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s silly people think an SRO would have stopped this.

well, we will never know now.

How many school shootings and/or arrest of a student who brought a gun to school has MCPS had, pre and post SRO removal?

What we KNOW is that a SRO would have drastically changed the response. The first 911 call was for a "community" officer for a school. It wasn't for an emergency police response for a school shooting. Precious time elapsed that allowed the shooter to hide in a classroom that was already in lockdown. Why was he allowed to enter that classroom after the lockdown?
An SRO would have locked the school down faster and trapped the shooter in the hall where he could have been apprehended instead of hiding.

I disagree wholeheartedly. These schools are huge. Unless the SRO was literally in the hallway it occurred in and happened to witness the event, they wouldn’t have known who it was or even what happened for several minutes. Obviously, teachers are trained to scan the hallway and collect all students they see before locking down so the shooter was probably pulled in by a teacher anyway. The way it played out may have gotten officers in the school a couple minutes quicker but the end result would have been the same. I am impressed that they maintained calm, found the student, and AVOIDED any more injuries. If they wouldn’t have been so careful, I believe the student would have been much more likely to freak out and turn the event into a mass shooting. I get it guys, we feel the natural need to criticize (cmon, you guys can’t really are about the color of people coats and ties, right?) because the kids we love the most are inside of those buildings. We NEED gun control NOW!

Your "probably" is not what happened.
Two hours to find a student with a gun inside a school wasn't being careful. The police thought the shooter had run out the door across the field. That's where they were looking first.

Holding the students hostage for 3 hours after the shooter was taken down and removed from the classroom is absurd. Students peeing in bottles was necessary because?????

Except for the nurse, the actions of those in charge do not inspire any confidence whatsoever. Withholding bathroom use from teachers and students for HOURS after the shooter was removed? Not releasing students to waiting parents for HOURS? Not treating the situation as though the shooter may still be on the premises? None of it makes sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s silly people think an SRO would have stopped this.

well, we will never know now.

How many school shootings and/or arrest of a student who brought a gun to school has MCPS had, pre and post SRO removal?

What we KNOW is that a SRO would have drastically changed the response. The first 911 call was for a "community" officer for a school. It wasn't for an emergency police response for a school shooting. Precious time elapsed that allowed the shooter to hide in a classroom that was already in lockdown. Why was he allowed to enter that classroom after the lockdown?
An SRO would have locked the school down faster and trapped the shooter in the hall where he could have been apprehended instead of hiding.

I disagree wholeheartedly. These schools are huge. Unless the SRO was literally in the hallway it occurred in and happened to witness the event, they wouldn’t have known who it was or even what happened for several minutes. Obviously, teachers are trained to scan the hallway and collect all students they see before locking down so the shooter was probably pulled in by a teacher anyway. The way it played out may have gotten officers in the school a couple minutes quicker but the end result would have been the same. I am impressed that they maintained calm, found the student, and AVOIDED any more injuries. If they wouldn’t have been so careful, I believe the student would have been much more likely to freak out and turn the event into a mass shooting. I get it guys, we feel the natural need to criticize (cmon, you guys can’t really are about the color of people coats and ties, right?) because the kids we love the most are inside of those buildings. We NEED gun control NOW!

Your "probably" is not what happened.
Two hours to find a student with a gun inside a school wasn't being careful. The police thought the shooter had run out the door across the field. That's where they were looking first.

Holding the students hostage for 3 hours after the shooter was taken down and removed from the classroom is absurd. Students peeing in bottles was necessary because?????

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Obviously we're on our way to reinstatement of SROs in schools, and thank goodness for that. I'll never understand people who wanted to defund police, etc. I'm all for left-wing policies, but only when they actually make sense. If you want to address racism in law enforcement, you make make police academies MORE selective, and you lure in smarter candidates with more attractive pay (same method if you want to increase teaching standards).The dumb people will never react well in crisis situations regardless of the training they get! You can't staff such positions with the poorly-paid and the ones without critical thinking skills, and then act surprised that they're incompetent.

Good luck achieving this with the police academies in the hands of the existing police force.

+1 To keep this close to home, look at the caes of the officers caught on camera abusing a 5 year-old child inside an MCPS school last year. No accountability. No repercussions. Nothing but a blue wall protecting bad cops from ever seeing their actions have consequences.

As long as the entire structure of policing continues to protect abusive cops, none of the changes listed above will ever happen. Except giving them more money, because rewarding abusive cops is the American Way (tm).

MCPD is filled with very good officers. It’s a strong police department. Yes, those two officers were in the wrong. Guess what? A lot of MCPD agrees. Instead of falling back on old arguments, I recommend you get to know current policing. Fortunately, there are a couple avenues through which you can do that. Request a ride-along. Attend the citizens’ academy. Instead of falling back on preconceived notions, get to know the department. They are out in the community and sponsor regular events.

There are good and bad employees in any workplace. I would say the good outweigh the bad in MCPD. SROs are the best of the best. Our SRO had been in our school for over a decade. She interacted with students to give them a smile. She knew students by name - not because they were in trouble but because she would take more time than the principal to have conversations with the students.

Yeah. I don’t want my kid interacting with police unless it is mandatory. I can see that you don’t understand it. You might reflect on the fact that your refusal to understand it is part of why there are no SROs in schools now.

I don't want my kid to interact with shooters in school.

Right, it comes down to whether kids can form a positive relationship with one SRO who is kid-friendly to begin with, or have their schools flooded with hundreds of SWAT like police with long guns searching for their fellow perpetrator student.

PREVENTION IS SO MUCH BETTER.

I don’t accept these as our only two options.

What? You don’t accept prevention as an option? What could be preferaable to prevention ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s silly people think an SRO would have stopped this.

well, we will never know now.

How many school shootings and/or arrest of a student who brought a gun to school has MCPS had, pre and post SRO removal?

What we KNOW is that a SRO would have drastically changed the response. The first 911 call was for a "community" officer for a school. It wasn't for an emergency police response for a school shooting. Precious time elapsed that allowed the shooter to hide in a classroom that was already in lockdown. Why was he allowed to enter that classroom after the lockdown?
An SRO would have locked the school down faster and trapped the shooter in the hall where he could have been apprehended instead of hiding.

I disagree wholeheartedly. These schools are huge. Unless the SRO was literally in the hallway it occurred in and happened to witness the event, they wouldn’t have known who it was or even what happened for several minutes. Obviously, teachers are trained to scan the hallway and collect all students they see before locking down so the shooter was probably pulled in by a teacher anyway. The way it played out may have gotten officers in the school a couple minutes quicker but the end result would have been the same. I am impressed that they maintained calm, found the student, and AVOIDED any more injuries. If they wouldn’t have been so careful, I believe the student would have been much more likely to freak out and turn the event into a mass shooting. I get it guys, we feel the natural need to criticize (cmon, you guys can’t really are about the color of people coats and ties, right?) because the kids we love the most are inside of those buildings. We NEED gun control NOW!

IMO, it's not just about whether an SRO in the school could have prevented the shooting that day but the overall need for adults to mentor and connect with kids to prevent incidents from escalating to the point where someone brings a gun to school to settle an argument.

DP here. The overall need for adults to mentor and connect with the kids is EXACTLY the reason why we need SROs back. Look at Seneca Valley and how the principal felt compelled to ask volunteer dads to do this very thing. Why doesn't the county value our students enough to pay for this? Why do we have to resort to volunteers to make up for this deficiency? I am sick and tired of these clueless idiots running this county and this school system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look a shady rapper wannabe brings a ghost gun to school to specifically shoot one person. Just one. He could have used a knife, bat, fists. It was never an active shooter thing

Doesn't him, you know, SHOOTING someone make it an "active shooter thing?" Since you seem so in the know, what was the motive?

Finding a wounded person in the bathroom is not an "active shooter" situation. It's a "someone was shot" situation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I hate when we criticize women for their clothes but here it was warranted. The child was in surgery but could have died or might still die though hopefully not. This was a sober scary worst nightmare scenario with kids locked in classrooms still. Dark coat. Don’t make it look like you did your hair first. There should not have been time.

The more important question is why did she stay home until time for the presser? Shouldn't she have at least headed to her office? This was a crisis event--I would have expected her to go to the school.

She wasn't at home.

Come on! Her office is 10 min from the school Of course she was coming from PG County.

Does Dr. McKnight live in PG County?

Yes. Her family is also recovering from covid, so I'm guessing she was working from home. I thought the speech was....suboptimal and hit the wrong tone, but I'm not going to come down hard on a working mom who was home with sick kids. The error here wasn't that she was in PG. It was that she was in PG and insisted on doing the briefing herself rather than delegating someone if she couldn't get there in time.

Why couldn’t students have been sent home before the briefing. Her speech did not even say anything. What was the point?

The timing for releasing kids had to do with police, not MCPS. They gave their press conference at a nearby school.

And you know this because? Both the police and MCPS have been very quiet about this.

No, they haven’t. Read any articles out in the local news. Some journalists have posted suck in Twitter with direct quotes from police.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
McKnight wasn't working from home.

Where was she? The incident started at 1pm. She was late to a 4:45pm press conference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is the police are the ones who slowed things down. They said there was not an active shooter situation, because they didn't want it to get out on social media that they were looking for the suspect, because they didn't want the suspect to start shooting more people. They also needed to collect evidence before it was all traded over. This one is not on MCPS for giving misinformation.

With all due respect to you this is conjecture. We need answers from the police and not from DCUM anons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I hate when we criticize women for their clothes but here it was warranted. The child was in surgery but could have died or might still die though hopefully not. This was a sober scary worst nightmare scenario with kids locked in classrooms still. Dark coat. Don’t make it look like you did your hair first. There should not have been time.

The more important question is why did she stay home until time for the presser? Shouldn't she have at least headed to her office? This was a crisis event--I would have expected her to go to the school.

She wasn't at home.

Come on! Her office is 10 min from the school Of course she was coming from PG County.

Does Dr. McKnight live in PG County?

Yes. Her family is also recovering from covid, so I'm guessing she was working from home. I thought the speech was....suboptimal and hit the wrong tone, but I'm not going to come down hard on a working mom who was home with sick kids. The error here wasn't that she was in PG. It was that she was in PG and insisted on doing the briefing herself rather than delegating someone if she couldn't get there in time.

Why couldn’t students have been sent home before the briefing. Her speech did not even say anything. What was the point?

The timing for releasing kids had to do with police, not MCPS. They gave their press conference at a nearby school.

And you know this because? Both the police and MCPS have been very quiet about this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I hate when we criticize women for their clothes but here it was warranted. The child was in surgery but could have died or might still die though hopefully not. This was a sober scary worst nightmare scenario with kids locked in classrooms still. Dark coat. Don’t make it look like you did your hair first. There should not have been time.

The more important question is why did she stay home until time for the presser? Shouldn't she have at least headed to her office? This was a crisis event--I would have expected her to go to the school.

She wasn't at home.

Come on! Her office is 10 min from the school Of course she was coming from PG County.

Does Dr. McKnight live in PG County?

Yes. Her family is also recovering from covid, so I'm guessing she was working from home. I thought the speech was....suboptimal and hit the wrong tone, but I'm not going to come down hard on a working mom who was home with sick kids. The error here wasn't that she was in PG. It was that she was in PG and insisted on doing the briefing herself rather than delegating someone if she couldn't get there in time.

Why couldn’t students have been sent home before the briefing. Her speech did not even say anything. What was the point?

The timing for releasing kids had to do with police, not MCPS. They gave their press conference at a nearby school.

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is the police are the ones who slowed things down. They said there was not an active shooter situation, because they didn't want it to get out on social media that they were looking for the suspect, because they didn't want the suspect to start shooting more people. They also needed to collect evidence before it was all traded over. This one is not on MCPS for giving misinformation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I hate when we criticize women for their clothes but here it was warranted. The child was in surgery but could have died or might still die though hopefully not. This was a sober scary worst nightmare scenario with kids locked in classrooms still. Dark coat. Don’t make it look like you did your hair first. There should not have been time.

The more important question is why did she stay home until time for the presser? Shouldn't she have at least headed to her office? This was a crisis event--I would have expected her to go to the school.

She wasn't at home.

Come on! Her office is 10 min from the school Of course she was coming from PG County.

Does Dr. McKnight live in PG County?

Yes. Her family is also recovering from covid, so I'm guessing she was working from home. I thought the speech was....suboptimal and hit the wrong tone, but I'm not going to come down hard on a working mom who was home with sick kids. The error here wasn't that she was in PG. It was that she was in PG and insisted on doing the briefing herself rather than delegating someone if she couldn't get there in time.

Why couldn’t students have been sent home before the briefing. Her speech did not even say anything. What was the point?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look a shady rapper wannabe brings a ghost gun to school to specifically shoot one person. Just one. He could have used a knife, bat, fists. It was never an active shooter thing

Doesn't him, you know, SHOOTING someone make it an "active shooter thing?" Since you seem so in the know, what was the motive?

Finding a wounded person in the bathroom is not an "active shooter" situation. It's a "someone was shot" situation.