The American Civil Liberties Union, which has a ephemeral relationship with certain civil liberties, does not like that the school police officer in your child’s school carries a gun.
Harold Jordan, a senior policy advocate for the ACLU of Pennsylvania, penned an op-ed for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Thursday, which was reposted on the ACLU’s main website Friday, that said cops stationed at Pittsburgh city schools should be forced to continue working without sidearms.
If I may take a moment, what is the point of school police if they don’t have firearms?
“Having officers patrol the hallways with firearms sends a negative message to students,” Jordan wrote. “It makes many students feel that they are being treated like suspects.”
Really? Do you feel like a suspect when you go into your bank to take care of your financial business? Or do you feel safe because you know that banks are targets for thieves and that security guards are equipped to protect the valuables in the bank along with their customers?
“Places of learning are not security zones or criminal justice institutions, and they should not be staffed that way,” Jordan went on to say.
Instead, this misguided utopian wants to decrease the need for armed protection in schools. “Emerging best practices aim to reduce police involvement in routine disciplinary school matters, ensure fairness in disciplinary processes, and increase the ratio of counselors and student support services to cops,” said Jordan.
Jordan’s op-ed was a response to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editorial that called for arming school resources officers. The resource officers are currently unarmed.
Given the population they protect and the tools currently at their disposal, school police officers may be better than their peers in municipal departments at de-escalating situations without force. Though additional training in firearms and use of force always would be welcome, this isn’t a group with itchy trigger fingers. …
Arming the school police wouldn’t be a rash act putting students, teachers and other employees at risk. With proper oversight, the measure would enhance safety rather than diminish it.
Makes sense to me.