I was recently involved in a discussion about this topic as our school has no SRO/police on campus, armed or unarmed. I’m wondering about the experiences of others. Does the presence of an armed police officer offer you security reassurance? Does it effect the way your child perceives his/her safety at school? Would you feel more or less secure if the officer was not armed? If your school doesn’t have an officer, would you add one?
Is the school in a high crime environment, or is there a specific type of criminal threat targeting the school? Are the local police generally considered trustworthy (versus corrupt, incompetent, or racist) by all parts of the community in the area?
We have one, although I don’t live in a high-crime area. I think it was mostly for the parents, and also because it’s the thing to do these days. Mostly he just directed traffic, broke up fights every month or two, and stood around (which is basically what the administrators most of the day as well). I would not feel confident in his ability to protect me from an actual threat, but I guess it does make me feel slightly safer on a superficial level. In reality, there’s no difference. I think they just needed something to do with the cops that didn’t work out at the police department.
No, my community would not have an appetite for an armed guard. And, no, I would not feel safer. I would be disturbed.
Exactly this ^^^
Our HS has 2 armed policemen and roughly half a dozen civilian (non-armed) security guards for approximately 1300 students. When you walk in the building, you immediately pass by the security office where you can see the security officers watching the 100+ screens that monitor the building. While the threat of an armed intruder is everywhere, at this school gang violence is the main concern. We lose a few kids every year. Last year one was in one of S19’s classrooms. I believe the police help keep the war outside of the school building, so yes, I did feel safer while my kids were there. And the policemen are not the young, trigger-happy new recruits. Rather, they are usually “older” (30s-50s) who seem to have skill at connecting with the kids.
Edit: I was quite nervous sending my kids to the school at first, especially since S16 was a “nerdy, skinny white kid.” I felt he would be eaten alive. My H who grew up here said not to worry. The rough kids are in awe of the smart kids. He was right. When S16 was a freshmen, he’d tell us how all these scary big guys would come up to him and ask if he was the kid who went to the local uni. When he’d say yes, they’d respond “oh, that’s cool, man.” It blew my mind. So while the school does have a lot of safety issues, I never really felt like my kids were in true danger. They did have to be smart. And I did have to listen to stories that would make me cringe. But as far as them being a target? Not really.
We have a police officer, armed, at the HS. Also a few unarmed security guards. I like it; never saw the point of only having unarmed security.
Our large high school that serves several suburbs (generally affluent, safe, predominantly white) has two armed police officers and many security personnel on site. I am not sure when the school added the armed police officers.
In the last several years, the school started requiring visitors to check-in at a security desk with an unarmed guard…this is at the two main entrances…there are over 40 entrances/doors into the school so it’s a large campus to secure. Even though we are in a low crime area, I support having the onsite police officers, as our school is pretty well known.
We have an armed SRO at our HS who is a member of the local police department. He is well liked by the students and has kids in the district. He has been there for a few years now, The kids feel comfortable talking to him. We live in a fairly affluent district in a semi-rural area with a high school of just over 1,000 students. We don’t have gangs or anything like that but our population is pretty similar to any of the schools where there have been mass shootings. There is only one accessible entrance and you must check in there, but it’s manned by school personnel.
The goal overall is to make students feel included and heard so they don’t turn into a bullied person looking to get back so having an SRO is more about letting the kids (and their parents) feel protected but not scared. All staff has had ALICE training as have the students, at levels appropriate to their age.
IMO, you have to have a two pronged approach to school safety - hardening the school so that it’s not an easy target - one entrance that’s manned, trained personnel, doors that close, security cameras, etc. The second is warm and fuzzier - make the teachers and students feel valued and included. Celebrate differences, teach empathy, zero allowance for bullying. Armed guards and metal detectors are not the answer by themselves.
My kids go/went to a magnet school that’s public. Zero gang issues, crime tends to be the troublemaking kind - pranks, drugs, but nothing that directly injures or threatens other students.
There is a full time, armed Sheriff’s Deputy stationed at the school. From a strategic perspective, I believe this is as effective at making the school safer as the imposing-looking fence they put on only one of the four sides of the 10 acre campus - IOW it has ZERO safety impact and is all in response to parents who demand the school district “do something.” The “do something” window dressing is costing our local school district millions of dollars and has done nothing to actually make most of the schools safer because most of the schools were built decades ago when security wasn’t a consideration, so cannot be reasonably secured.
Even sadder, some of these show attempts to pacify parents have resulted in changes that would make it easier for school shooters for example to take out more children. But the district can say they “did something” and most parents are frankly too dumb to think through if the changes help or hurt.
There was a move recently to put armed guards in all schools in our district, including elementary, but there’s also been a lot of parent pushback. Not sure where it stands right now. I think it came from the same window dressing kind of mindset that @milee30 describes.
D’s high school just got an armed SRO, mostly due to parental push. Large, extremely wealthy, low crime public. SRO just happens to be my neighbor who just retired from a neighboring police department and was hired as an hourly employee of the police department of the town the school is in. He sits at the entrance when kids check in, helps direct traffic when the buses are in the lot, etc. No crime that I’ve ever heard of in our school - unless you count vaping.
I’m indifferent. I wasn’t worried about safely before. The fact that he’s a retired officer with 25 years experience but still young (50 - it’s all relative! lol) doesn’t make me nervous about him being armed.
Both public and private schools in our area had armed officers. The few times they were needed were for medical emergencies.
Our hs has plenty of unarmed security and I believe it has 37 doors or something like that. (When years ago a small group of parents were agitating for metal detectors - the principal replied that it would be almost impossible to monitor.) After an incident last year there is again a group of parents agitating, this time for an armed officer. It’s been a really divisive topic. The big worry is that many studies show that when an SRO is in the school too often minority kids get mistreated by them.
We have an SRO who is armed. We live close to Sandy Hook, and having an SRO at school is really the norm in our area now.
Similar to @walkinghome , our SRO does a lot at our school with regard to fostering relationships with kids and parents. He’s very involved in our school and has created an environment of trust with the kids and the staff. He’s involved on many different levels with kids and has been a part of many prevention/education programs. He’s another trusted individual at our school for both students and staff to turn to with concerns.
Because of those relationships that he’s built and fostered, I do feel safer with him at our school.
Haven’t the worst high school shooting been in schools with armed security guards? (Thinking of Columbine and Parkland in particular).
So no, it doesn’t particularly make me feel safer nor does it make my kids feel safer. I do think it pacifies some of the parents though. Our school recently added one on a trial basis.
The public high schools in our area that I have toured all have multiple armed guards, including one permanently stationed at the metal detectors you pass through to get into the school, and high security fences that essentially lock the kids within a perimeter. These are schools that feel like prisons to me.
We have an armed SRO in our kids’ public high school. He positions himself near the entrance of the school during class changes but interacts with all of the kids. He has an incredible amount of social skills and the kids love him. I think it helps a lot to diffuse tensions that he knows the kids so well, especially the ones who have issues. I think our school is safer because it’s almost like having another school counselor-- one who may be tuned into the kids’ everyday lives even more than the counselors. I’m not sure it matters that he’s armed.
My kids had one at their large, diverse public HS. It didn’t make me feel safer. The vice principals were still best at handling discipline, with help from a variety of sharp eyed, sensitive adults, including custodians, who were aware of what was going on. Fights, vandalism, bullying, all of those were handled by other people. I think the district liked to tell parents there was a cop at every school.
I think there was this undercover kind of guy, a man who was not dressed like a cop or as an administrator, who floated around.
If you had the ‘power’ to hire or eliminate an armed officer at your school, what call would you make? If I’m an influencer/decision-maker at the school and opt out of the armed protection and–god forbid–a tragedy takes place, I’m sure I’d feel terribly guilty for not having taken that step. Maybe it helps, maybe it doesn’t but it seems like a sensible option in today’s world. It’s a very divisive topic…