2 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

I understand not ruining a kids life, but where's the lesson with just suspending them? That's a vacation for them. There has to be tougher consequences. 

As for the parents, this stuff starts at home the majority of the time. 

The American Education system is in shambles... what's a shame is that it takes THAT to get suspended. They don't for just about anything else. Teachers are perpetually worn-out and overstimulated babysitters. 

1 minute ago, ChickenWyngz said:

The American Education system is in shambles... what's a shame is that it takes THAT to get suspended. They don't for just about anything else. Teachers are perpetually worn-out and overstimulated babysitters. 

And looking like it may get even worse. 

4 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

I understand not ruining a kids life, but where's the lesson with just suspending them? That's a vacation for them. There has to be tougher consequences. 

As for the parents, this stuff starts at home the majority of the time. 

 

3 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

I agree with this. Having an officer in a school purely for show is a waste of resources. If they can't arrest a kid they find drugs on, what's the point of them being there. 

They also shouldn't be looking to traditional police officers to break up fights. Other resources should be utilized, mainly prevention. 

If the state cared, they would take this decision out of the school's hands. If a kid is found with drugs at a school event or on grounds, they're arrested... period. Extreme punishments for covering it up. Figure out what the real numbers are and address it accordingly. 

Just now, TheDeuce said:

And looking like it may get even worse. 

Or better, time will tell.

2 minutes ago, theguru said:

Or better, time will tell.

I sure as heck hope so. I had a retired educator say all of life is up and down, eventually, we'll hit the bottom. We've gotta be close...

In the meantime, we're producing a pretty miserable and useless society. 

19 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

I agree with this. Having an officer in a school purely for show is a waste of resources. If they can't arrest a kid they find drugs on, what's the point of them being there. 

They also shouldn't be looking to traditional police officers to break up fights. Other resources should be utilized, mainly prevention. 

I wouldn't say purely for show because in some instances school resource officers do stop school shooters and many resource officers have very positive interactions with the students. 

On the rest of it, if the police are going to break up a fight in school, one or possibly both of the people involved in the fight should be charged in juvenile court.  And if the police are not going to charge juveniles in the schools for fighting, drug offenses, etc. then the police have no business being involved in those matters.  

When I was on the job, I mostly hated dealing with the schools, often times they were insufferable. 

9 minutes ago, theguru said:

I wouldn't say purely for show because in some instances school resource officers do stop school shooters and many resource officers have very positive interactions with the students. 

On the rest of it, if the police are going to break up a fight in school, one or possibly both of the people involved in the fight should be charged in juvenile court.  And if the police are not going to charge juveniles in the schools for fighting, drug offenses, etc. then the police have no business being involved in those matters.  

When I was on the job, I mostly hated dealing with the schools, often times they were insufferable. 

My comment was more directed at how the schools "allow" the officers to conduct their business. If a school doesn't want an officer to handle those situations in the way that they should be, outside of bonding with the students, it's a waste of time. 

Just now, TheDeuce said:

My comment was more directed at how the schools "allow" the officers to conduct their business. If a school doesn't want an officer to handle those situations in the way that they should be, outside of bonding with the students, it's a waste of time. 

That and protection, they are still an armed law enforcement officer. 

3 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

Start arresting these kids and their parents. 

KY is extremely soft on juveniles. Unless they're a proven threat to their guardians/families they live with, they're not getting locked up.

Ohio has a law on the books that, I had recently heard of last year, the Serious Youthful Offender. My understanding is that it's geared towards juveniles that engage in violent crime as well as organized crime, think stolen vehicles or gun shop burglaries. The state recognized that without the SYO laws, kids were actually being utilized for specific crimes because there was likely not going to be any serious consequences if they were caught. 

1 minute ago, sportsfan41 said:

KY is extremely soft on juveniles. Unless they're a proven threat to their guardians/families they live with, they're not getting locked up.

Ohio has a law on the books that, I had recently heard of last year, the Serious Youthful Offender. My understanding is that it's geared towards juveniles that engage in violent crime as well as organized crime, think stolen vehicles or gun shop burglaries. The state recognized that without the SYO laws, kids were actually being utilized for specific crimes because there was likely not going to be any serious consequences if they were caught. 

Right, so soft on juveniles that in my day no one wanted to deal with "juvenile anything" because it was one big waste of time and nothing ever happened. 

Also, a normal talking point was "wait until these kids start having kids" and we are well immersed in it now. 

43 minutes ago, theguru said:

Right, so soft on juveniles that in my day no one wanted to deal with "juvenile anything" because it was one big waste of time and nothing ever happened. 

Also, a normal talking point was "wait until these kids start having kids" and we are well immersed in it now. 

I don't think anything has changed in that regard. 

9 hours ago, theguru said:

This is a layered issue but it is also why I am NOT for regular police officers in schools.  I think we should have "special forces types" in schools and police officers should still be police officers when illegal things happen inside schools.  Instead, what we have is police officers not enforcing the law because the schools don't want them to.  The instant that started happening, the police should have left the schools and let them hire private security. 

My brother-in-law is retired LMPD but now works as JCPS officer and they don't want them in schools except for when they call for them so pretty good gig if your a cop. 

13 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

Start arresting these kids and their parents. 

Wholeheartedly agree.

That said, I would be curious to see how many of these kids involved in this behavior have both of their parents raising them at home, how many just have Mom, and how many have neither.

I was speaking to a subject matter expert in the field of School Resource Officers. JCPS unless something has changed recently, did not want their own officers in the schools. They are to remain in their cars traveling between schools and are to only enter the school if summoned by the school. They were forbidden from carrying a baton, taser or firearm until a policy change was forced on JCPS. The officers are all certified Kentucky Law Enforcement Officers, either hired from another agency or hired and sent to the academy. JCPS Police Division is pretty widely considered one of the worst Law Enforcement Jobs in Kentucky due to total lack of support from system administrators. 

9 hours ago, Randy Parker said:

Wholeheartedly agree.

That said, I would be curious to see how many of these kids involved in this behavior have both of their parents raising them at home, how many just have Mom, and how many have neither.

I hate to stereotype, but I'm going to assume the overwhelming majority are in a single parent household.