Come on bro, you can't lock kids behind several feet of concrete and steel in an airtight vault requiring many levels of authentication to unlock.
Wait. Is this another one of your attempts to add humor or something? Or are you taking my recommendations literally? I'm very aware that kids can't be in an airtight vault. I never said they needed to be.
It would be extremely heartless to actually want kids in schools to be protected like money in banks since banks are willingly to sacrifice all of the money in the bank at any given time before asking anyone to risk their life for it. It is just money and they are insured against those losses so they get it back. I don't think you really want to treat kids or teachers' lives the same way.
Oh crap. You are taking me literally.
I guess if there is one policy that I can relate to the intent of your comparison it would be the very effective procedure of locking down classrooms and securing the doors to prevent shooters from entering. There are reports of that saving lives in this case as well as previous cases.
Now apply that lock-down process to an entire building/campus. Expand keeping people out of a classroom to keeping them out of the building.
I've been in enough courthouses to see that it is nothing like a school. The nature of a courthouse creates a very high concentration of law enforcement officers in the building that does not happen in schools.
Dude. I understand that the population of a courthouse is different than a school. That isn't the point. The point is the physical security model is there and can be utilized in a school setting. Not that schools need a high concentration of police officers on site.
Everyone does not complain about that nor has it been determined in any version of reality that cops have no responsibility to protect us All SROs are dedicated to ONLY school security, that is the definition of the job. They are employed by the local PD or Sheriff's office.
What reality do you live in? Here is
one such reality where it was determined.
In a 4–3 decision, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial courts' dismissal of the complaints against the District of Columbia and individual members of the Metropolitan Police Department based on the
public duty doctrine ruling that "the duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists". The Court thus adopted the trial court's determination that no special relationship existed between the police and appellants, and therefore no specific legal duty existed between the police and the appellants.
From what I remember around the first time I heard the title SRO it was created because of the concerns around putting cops in schools. The biggest issue had to do with the psychological impact of their presence on the kids. The goal of the SRO was to carefully select and train cops to not be the scary guy with a gun in the school, but be very active fostering direct, positive relationships with the students. I know SROs are a thing in the south, but don't know how prevalent they actually are there or the rest of the nation.
People are concerned that SROs will target specific kids and harras them with threats of arrest or outright arrest. That's why I said they should be employees of the school and not cops on loan to the school.
