Isn't it interesting that in the Feb. 18 issue of The Frederick News-Post we are bombarded by the Republican representatives as to how important it is to have school resource officers in the Frederick County Public Schools. These are members of the same political party as those who caused death and destruction in our national Capitol. Now, they are back trying to tell us how important law enforcement is in our schools.

Most educators would appreciate having more teachers and more specialists to make the school environment more productive, rather than a law enforcement officer walking the halls who functions as someone to break up fights. Teachers would appreciate help in having capable staff to avoid fights from occurring rather than closing the door after the horse has left.

I suspect that these so-called representatives, would sing a different song if the sheriff were not of their party. They do seem to talk differently about deputies than they do teachers. Do you think they really care?

(25) comments

Awteam2021

As earlier stated, before the epidemic of school shootings, School Resource Officers (SROs) were present in only 1% of schools. Today, that number exceeds 40%. The purpose was to protect from outside or inside potential threats, provide safe learning environments in schools, a resource to school staff members, foster positive relationships with students, and protecting all youth and staff, so that they could reach their fullest potential.

The question should be, are they carrying out these objectives or has it now become a system of “school-to-prison pipeline”, rather then simply disciplining one for bad behavior. Has it now turned into making students criminals? In my day, if you acted up in school, you were sent to the principals office or down to the wood shop, not to prison.

I think it’s fair to access how the resource is being utilize. Hopefully not to torment children.

Piedmontgardener

Since Columbine, this isn't a discussion that requires much thought for me. I was completely happy with SRO's during our kids school time in the country and I'm completely fine with continuing that presence. Shouldn't be a political argument here.

phydeaux994

I’m sure FCPS has a record of the incidents in the schools and how often the SRO’s have had to intervene. Why can’t they publish this information so we can make an informed judgment about the necessity of having them in the schools.

NewMarketParent

Schools can have staff to deal with behavioral problems. They do not need a police nor a nanny state.

Guy T. Ashton

As a parent of kids in FCPS high school over the past 7 years now, I can say that your suggestions completely ignore the realities of high school life. My kids have been witness to some pretty violent lunchtime fights that thankfully had a SRO available to act. Your intentions may be well meaning, but the reality is the SRO presence is needed and appreciated, regardless of political affiliation.

Blueline

You give Mr. Burrell too much credit. He is a shill for the Democrat Party.

neilyoungfan25

And his letter is just plain stupid!

bosco

[thumbup] What's needed is more parents actually parenting instead of dumping their convict trainees on the school system to deal with.

phydeaux994

And you Blueline are a shill for the Republican Party. Are Republican shills o.k. and Democratic shills not o.k.?

dtwigg

[thumbup]

Hayduke2

Blue - why not respond to the content of the letter rather than immediately try to make it political? It is okay, maybe even beneficial, to have opposing views.

Hayduke2

Guy - Is this any different than when you were in HS? Are the fights somehow more vicious? While I agree that a SRO can be a positive influence if trained for this type of duty, there can also be negatives attached to this. Not trying to be contrary, just curious. Both of my sons are recent FCPS grads.

Guy T. Ashton

I honestly do not recall any knock down drag out fights when I was in school, but that was 1980 and I was in a small town. Times have changed and kids seem way more tending to violence. When I was in school it seemed teachers could manage a fist fight or two, but that doesn’t seem to be the level of violence today. When teachers get hurt breaking up fights it’s no longer their responsibility. These are big kids, grownup sized, children or not.

MD1756

This may explain quite a bit of it ... see: https://family.jrank.org/pages/1574/Single-Parent-Families-Demographic-Trends.html

"There was a dramatic increase in single-parent families in the United States in the last three decades of the twentieth century; only 13 percent of families were headed by a single parent in 1970. Over one-fourth of children in the United States lived with a single parent in 1996, double the proportion in 1970. Approximately 84 percent of these families are headed by women. Of all single-parent families, the most common are those headed by divorced or separated mothers (58%) followed by never-married mothers (24%). Other family heads include widows (7%), divorced and separated fathers (8.4%), never-married fathers (1.5%), and widowers (0.9%). There is racial variation in the proportion of families headed by a single parent: 22 percent for white, 57 percent for black, and 33 percent for Hispanic families." According to Kid's Count Data Center (https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by-race#detailed/1/any/false/1729,37,871,870,573,869,36,868,867,133/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/432,431) the percent of children in single parent families in the U.S. was 34% - 35% in the period from 2010 to 2019. (15% for Asians, 24% for non-Hispanic white, 42% for Hispanic and 64% for Black).

Combine that with the following from "Single-Parent Family Social Problems" By: Ayra Moore 28 November, 2018 see: https://www.hellomotherhood.com/article/72423-daycare-vs.-stay-home-parent/

"Delinquency Children of single-parent households are more commonly involved in delinquent activities than those living in two-parent households. Research published in the “Journal of Research on Adolescence” by Cynthia Harper found that adolescent males who live in father-absent households are more at risk for delinquency and youth incarceration than those living in father-mother households. "

Dwasserba

[thumbup]I feel bad giving a thumbs up but I've heard things

MD1756

Are you willing to give up your income tax credits/deductions you get for having children in order to protect your children from other children while at school? If not, why not? I believe the resources are better spent directly on education and any discipline problems should involve the parents more directly. For repeat offenders, maybe the parents of those children need to be brought into school during the day to monitor their children's behavior instead of imposing that burden on the tax payers.

Hayduke2

MD - your stance on children and tax credits is well documented. No need to continue to make that point.

MD1756

As long as there are parents that continue to ask for more money for schools and it is based on emotion and not logic, and as long as I'm taxed more than parents are for a service I don't use, I will continue to speak out. No one has yet been able to say why those with no children should have their income taxed more than those who have children and place a higher burden on state and local budgets. After all, those who don't drive vehicles aren't taxed more to pay for roads than those who do drive vehicles in fact they are taxed less, as it should be. Here, I'm just asking if the parent is willing to be taxed as much as I am for an added service they are demanding. So when someone suggests something that I think wastes my tax dollars I will speak up. Pay for bodyguards for your children out of your own pocket. I'd rather have the extra tax I have to pay go for actual education and not body guards. If someone wants to spend more and is willing to pay the cost then I will not have a comment except "more power to you."

phydeaux994

I don’t go to State and National Parks MD, why should I pay to support them? I guess you’re saying everything should be pay as you go. Clean air and water, roads, Museums, everything MD. Why just schools? You don’t believe in “for the common good” philosophy?? Of course the Republicans call that SOCIALISM but I think it works pretty well. Insurance works the same way, the good pay for the bad. Whatcha think?

Hayduke2

MD - I am confused. Please help. You wrote " After all, those who don't drive vehicles aren't taxed more to pay for roads than those who do drive vehicles in fact they are taxed less, as it should be." I know several elderly folks who no longer drive, please tell me how I can help them get their tax dollars back.

MD1756

Hayduke2, your alleged confusion is apparently beyond my ability to help. The user fee type taxes should be quite obvious and easy to understand.

MD1756

I don't know why some people like to act like they've lost their brains when it comes to taxes. Never have I said I should not pay any taxes to support education. Anyone who says that's what I'm arguing is intentionally lying or has a problem comprehending simple English. Not one of you who commonly object to my position on income tax deductions/credits has put forth an argument that is equitable as to why those with no children should pay more in income taxes than those who do have children. It's as if one doesn't have a reasonable response so one has to make up lies about my position on taxes. Falsely claiming I don't believe in the "common good" just make one look stupid based on my many statements that suggest do believe in the common good. What I don't believe in is giving parents income tax deductions/credits for choosing to have children (and for the record, I am against most targeted income tax deduction/credits especially for gambling losses).

Hayduke2

Sorry MD, you implied that they somehow get a tax break, which they don't. Trying to spin it to tolls, etc. isn't the same. Not obvious.

Hayduke2

MD - was your own public education free? If the answer, your parent(s) received a tax break, no? Can we selectively decide to pay taxes for fire protection, or police forces? If I don't use a public library or park, should I get a tax break. I firmly believe that providing strong public education improves the communities in which we live, regardless of whether the individual living there has children or not.

phydeaux994

MD, You still haven’t given a logical reason why everyone paying for schools isn’t the same as everyone paying for infrastructure or parks or anything else that is provided for by our Government whether they use them or not.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. No vulgar, racist, sexist or sexually-oriented language.
Engage ideas. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, not personal attacks or ad hominem criticisms.
TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
Be civil. Don't threaten. Don't lie. Don't bait. Don't degrade others.
No trolling. Stay on topic.
No spamming. This is not the place to sell miracle cures.
No deceptive names. Apparently misleading usernames are not allowed.
Say it once. No repetitive posts, please.
Help us. Use the 'Report' link for abusive posts.

Thank you for reading!

Already a member?

Login Now
Click Here!

Currently a News-Post subscriber?

Activate your membership at no additional charge.
Click Here!

Need more information?

Learn about the benefits of membership.
Click Here!

Ready to join?

Choose the membership plan that fits your needs.
Click Here!