Please message the moderators if you wish to discuss a removal.Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread, you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.
You mean less accountable before the age of cell phones and vestcams? Less accountable then the age of social media that informed you of every possible (and some entirely made up) wrong doing? Less accountable than the mainstream media reporting on cops in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's?
Maybe just consider what you saying before posting.
They have more training, more focus on DEI/Equity etc
There’s definitely more accountability for police than 20 years ago, why would you say otherwise?
When has a police officer last been held accountable? Better yet, when has a police department ever faced consequences other than cushy retirement or paid leave? As far as I know, the review boards for police misconduct haven't sided against the police....ever
The disciplinary hearings and outcomes are public, it happens often. There’s body cams today too. Again, why would you think that police 20 yrs ago were better or were more accountable than today?
Excellent news.
I remember my elementary school officer as well as the high school one. They seemed very welcome, friendly, and I personally liked having them there.
I feel like their removal was done to appease a very small loud group of folks. While I respect their position, I do not yield my own.
You took away the ability of teachers (the authority you might appeal to before a cop in this case) from being able to deal with these problems. Surprisingly the problems just didn't disappear.
I didn't realize the program was stopped. I personally never felt unsafe with police in my school growing up not everyone has the same experience I think a good middle ground especially for communities with racial and poverty barriers that could cause over policing of children.
My daughter only felt safe in her Toronto school when the police were there. Otherwise it was likely you'd lose some piece of property or get assaulted.
We moved to a small city an hour Toronto and all of a sudden we no longer had those fears.
If children are assaulting other children and robbing them that's not over policing. It's under penalizing by the school system
Having grown up at a time/in a place where these programs weren’t really a thing, I don’t really have a dog in this fight. That said, I’m not sure why disciplinary issues like those you have described wouldn’t or couldn’t be handled by school staff.
I mean, when I was young, kids who got caught fighting or stealing stuff (or vandalizing stuff, or smoking in the washroom, or skipping class, etc. etc.) were handled by the teachers or vice principals, who doled out anything between a mild dressing down and outright suspension. (I recall one expulsion, but I believe those are dealt with at the Board level.)
As a kid, I thought the only reason we even had vice principals was to maintain order, Judge Dredd style. Frankly, I low-key still think that.
The use of suspensions was also considered as racism and efforts were put in place to limit or ban suspensions and expulsions from the public school system.
Idk I got straight up assaulted by groups of teenagers that went to a neighbouring school to mine because I to quote “looked different” (white kid in a black area). I don’t think the principal scolding them would have done anything to prevent it and wouldn’t want kids to have to deal with that at school consistently. It’s all about areas but some high schools have full on gang activity going on and teaching staff shouldn’t be expected to act as law enforcement.
Fair enough, and that's consistent with what I've said elsewhere in this thread:
Whether or how a SRO program should be offered seems like precisely the sort of decision that should be made at a more local level, by school boards that are familiar with and responsive to the unique concerns of their communities.
It's not just ever-complaining parents. There's also ever-complaining politicans, ever-complaining communities, ever-complaining social media lookiloos. Toss in a handful of grifting and self promotion and I don't blame the schools for not wanting to play the ' do we get hit with the million dollar suck stick '. I do blame the teachers for not realizing that someone needed to hold authority in a school full of little half developed people.
When you were young, there's a good chance school staff were allowed to discipline students, make physical contact to the extent needed to break up fights, remove privileges in response to bad behaviour, attach grade penalties, fail students, and so fourth. We live in a different world right now. Schools rely on the police because they know it's the least likely means to attract a lawsuit, let alone a press or social media campaign naming and defaming school personnel as racist, transphobic, sexist, homophobic, bullies, ableist, xenophobic, etc.
Having police in school is a net negative when it comes to intervention. Cops apply the law, that's their job.
They will criminalize any situations instead of finding alternate program that allows a kid to change their behaviour instead of destroying their lives with criminal charges
Visible minority here, went to high school in one of the worse parts of GTA. I felt safe when cops were present. The only ones that didn't felt safe were the ones that were stealing or dealing something.
Indigenous men commits close to 30% of all murders in Canada. I’m certain there are major systemic issues that cause such insane statistics but to say that police are being racist instead of just responding to areas with high crime rates is inaccurate. The people that are victims are also indigenous and they deserve to be protected.
Just a reminder that when Doug Ford’s own Ministry of Education appointed a supervisor and took over the Peel District School Board in 2020, one of the first things they did was to remove cops from schools. Have any reporters asked the government about this flip flop, or like speed cameras is Ford just allowed to decide the narrative on every issue?
It appears that decision was made by Peel Regional Police in consultation with the interim director of education, who was indeed appointed by the provincial supervisor. There does not appear to be any evidence that anyone at the political level was involved in suspending Peel's SRO program, which is as it should be.
I don't think it's accurate to describe this as a flip flop. Rather, I think it's yet another example of the Ford government interfering—albeit belatedly—in local decisions they don't like. Frankly, I think that's worse than any flip-flop.
The Ministry directly controlled PDSB during that period, which is the template they’ve now applied to several other boards. The school board trustees and director of education had no real power. The MoE supervisor would not have autonomy to do whatever they wanted, they were acting on behalf of the government. Whether you want to consider that “political influence” or not is more or less semantics.
If their hand picked supervisor went through with this move then either a) they aren’t paying attention to what the supervisors are doing, which directly contradicts their stated reasoning for needing to take over boards, or b) they approved of it. Either way, it’s a legitimate question to ask the government. The Queen’s Park press galley consistently lets Ford push them around and get away with framing every issue however he wants. It’s a large part of the reason for why he’s been able to escape every scandal that pops up and it’s been like this since the pandemic.
The whole point of appointing a supervisor is to have a day-to-day manager so you, the guy above the supervisor, need not focus on the day-to-day minutae. And we're talking about 2020, a time where yes, whether cops were or were not in schools was about number 82,000 on the list of priorities for the government.
That aside, I agree with your comments about the lack of substantive journalism by the press gallery (a gripe that extends beyond Queen's Park and beyond Ontario).
Personally happy to hear this. I know many teachers don’t like it but my wife is a teacher. She is in a school that has many problem students where violence is a real concern and safety issue. Can’t see how having some adults who are actually allowed to physically stop kids from being violent is a bad thing.
Don’t disagree but they won’t be in a he school only for events such as career day or sports. Yes teachers have it hard and you’re right there where Ford should be placing the Police…..but he’s not sadly.
It’s a start at least. I don’t think Ford is to blame for police being banned. As the article states its school boards and teachers who are against it.
This seems like very good news, getting rid of the SRO was a terrible problem pushed by ideologically extreme school boards, and it's good to see the provincial government retake control over this.
Most people I know only had good memories of the program, and it's opponents were engaged in criminal activity. Why should a small activist fringe be allowed to make things worse for everyone.
Not all opponents were engaged in criminal activities, especially if you were a person of African or Caribbean descent. While I'm in favour of this change, I think it important to note why there is pushback.
I'm fairly confident that the people at those types of schools have no problems with SROs, and infact have police that can come to the school on demand. But that's not the problem here, rich schools are unaffected by the lack of SROs because there are less problem students. The removal of SROs mainly negatively affected students in poorer districts
Why? Private schools by definition have different policies from public ones. And most of the private schools wouldn’t turn down cops they just isn’t a need and it wouldn’t be a good use of public funds.
Based on statistics, there is just as many assaults and sexual assaults, just as much drug use, etc. in those schools. Why is it only the rich who have privately owned security to cover up things?
Not really, cops are not in every public school, usually just the ones with the most violent incidents. Does the private owned security cover things up? Police in schools is more relationship building vs investigating etc
Given the number of class action lawsuits against these sorts of schools, where all the effort was into protecting the reputation of the institution instead of protecting the children in their care, yes. Privately owned security does cover things up for the people who sign their paycheques.
Why wouldn’t they be class action lawsuits, everyone who attends is wealthy enough to hire lawyers? Ofc an organization is going to try to protect their rep when faced with a lawsuit. That’s why we have neutral third parties to deal with this - government, justice system.
Again, the purpose of police in schools is being a liaison for the schools and building relationships with students. Not every public school has uniformed police liaisons, most dont. Most private schools would also love to have uniformed police and the parents would love that too. But it wouldn’t be a good use of public funds.
That program was only as good as the cops sent to a given school were. Some were great, others were bigoted assholes who had severe prejudices against nonwhite students
and it's opponents were engaged in criminal activity.
[citation needed]
Why should a small activist fringe be allowed to make things worse for everyone.
It wasn’t just a “small activist fringe” supposedly making things worse for everyone. The program was shuttered because countless students had horrid experiences with the school resource officers, and were justifiably angry about it.
The same logic also applies to the opponents. The decision to remove the program was not based on findings derived from data, but from the whims of semi-accountable ideologues.
According to the article we are commenting on, you are wrong. They actually gathered data through surveys, which would be far more representative. Additionally, they do not claim it is a majority of students who have issues with the officers, but rather a sizeable minority.
You may be confused about the concept of a representative sample. These two quotes are not at odds.
A representative sample is required to get an accurate estimate, unlike an informal survey of the people one person talks to. A sizeable minority being impacted by something is reason enough to act on it. A sizeable minority wouldn’t be 5%, it would be more like 30%. We often make decisions/rules/laws based on a sizeable minority.
A measure (30%) that becomes a target ceases to become a useful measure. Surveys are notoriously vulnerable to doctoring for a desired outcome, so please excuse my skepticism. I'm sure this number was met by phrasing the questions.
I'm so goddamn frustrated at people expecting teachers to deal with disruption, let alone violence ("bullying" tee hee, it's not a serious crime if it's a child) and theft.
If you don't want SROs, advocate for an alternative. Pulling them and expecting teachers to deal with the fallout on top of everything else is horseshit. This is causing far more harm than good, based on the evidence of people's eyes and ears. The command to disregard those will be disobeyed.
What makes you think there is a target for the measure?
The irony of claiming that collected data can be biased and therefore we should rely on bias without any data is crazy. Where is the evidence of the value of officers in schools? Is there data that shows whether they actually have a tangible impact on bullying, theft, and violence?
The cop at my school was great and definitely had a positive impact on most students, may racialized students included. If my experience were universal, keeping cops in schools would be a no brainer. However, I simply would not assume that my experience is universal without any evidence and in fact with evidence to the contrary.
Whether or how a SRO program should be offered seems like precisely the sort of decision that should be made at a more local level, by school boards that are familiar with and responsive to the unique concerns of their communities.
Having said that, I do think it’s petty af to bar uniformed police officers from attending their children’s career days.
I don’t see a need for this in 90% of schools. Maybe a rotation thing where they are at one school in the morning, one after recess and one in the afternoon walking around and making their presence known. In schools with issues maybe sure. Or just park a cop car there in the morning that kids will see when they walk in and then think twice about doing something.
No, not having the same officer stationed long-term defeats the purpose entirely. It's to make them part of the school community, a familiar presence to the kids, like a teacher or a counselor, someone that they feel comfortable speaking to about issues which may lead to prevention of worse things happening. They're not meant to a crime deterrent like you're suggesting, because the vast majority of kids aren't criminals, and just them occasionally being there as a faceless cop won't make kids want to talk to them.
In practice they usually end up intimidating the children on the regular though. The cops have one tool for all solutions and its treating people like criminals. This is very apparent every single time an rcmp is called to do a wellness check and they assault the person.
Yea, because both parties are basically strangers to each other. The whole point of having an officer stationed long-term is so that they AREN'T strangers. Also, the people that require wellness checks from the RCMP are more often than not people with issues, why else would they need the police to do wellness checks? Completely different from the average school kid.
This is a reminder to read the rules before posting in this subreddit.
Please message the moderators if you wish to discuss a removal. Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread, you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Anyone saying this program worked fine 20 years ago needs to realize that cops TODAY are very different, in training, in temperament, in attitude.
They are also less accountable than they've ever been, and that alone would make me extremely wary of having them around my children.
You mean less accountable before the age of cell phones and vestcams? Less accountable then the age of social media that informed you of every possible (and some entirely made up) wrong doing? Less accountable than the mainstream media reporting on cops in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's?
Maybe just consider what you saying before posting.
They have more training, more focus on DEI/Equity etc There’s definitely more accountability for police than 20 years ago, why would you say otherwise?
When has a police officer last been held accountable? Better yet, when has a police department ever faced consequences other than cushy retirement or paid leave? As far as I know, the review boards for police misconduct haven't sided against the police....ever
SIU brought murder charges with Forcillo. Not often enough but it happens.
The disciplinary hearings and outcomes are public, it happens often. There’s body cams today too. Again, why would you think that police 20 yrs ago were better or were more accountable than today?
Excellent news. I remember my elementary school officer as well as the high school one. They seemed very welcome, friendly, and I personally liked having them there.
I feel like their removal was done to appease a very small loud group of folks. While I respect their position, I do not yield my own.
[removed]
Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.
This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.
This is so backward. We're inherently treating kids like criminals, and you know the bullying will not end. Terrible terrible terrible
No they are just stopping inherently treating police as villians
LOL.
Perhaps if students weren't assholes to each other, there wouldn't be a need to have a cop around.
so a cop is in the bathroom and every class all the time?
the cop will be bored and look for trouble, and will target kids he thinks are his ideological opposites.
What is this observation based on?
You took away the ability of teachers (the authority you might appeal to before a cop in this case) from being able to deal with these problems. Surprisingly the problems just didn't disappear.
I didn't realize the program was stopped. I personally never felt unsafe with police in my school growing up not everyone has the same experience I think a good middle ground especially for communities with racial and poverty barriers that could cause over policing of children.
My daughter only felt safe in her Toronto school when the police were there. Otherwise it was likely you'd lose some piece of property or get assaulted.
We moved to a small city an hour Toronto and all of a sudden we no longer had those fears.
If children are assaulting other children and robbing them that's not over policing. It's under penalizing by the school system
Having grown up at a time/in a place where these programs weren’t really a thing, I don’t really have a dog in this fight. That said, I’m not sure why disciplinary issues like those you have described wouldn’t or couldn’t be handled by school staff.
Why would theft and assault be handled by school staff?
I mean, when I was young, kids who got caught fighting or stealing stuff (or vandalizing stuff, or smoking in the washroom, or skipping class, etc. etc.) were handled by the teachers or vice principals, who doled out anything between a mild dressing down and outright suspension. (I recall one expulsion, but I believe those are dealt with at the Board level.)
As a kid, I thought the only reason we even had vice principals was to maintain order, Judge Dredd style. Frankly, I low-key still think that.
The use of suspensions was also considered as racism and efforts were put in place to limit or ban suspensions and expulsions from the public school system.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/peel-school-board-racism-1.5496611
Idk I got straight up assaulted by groups of teenagers that went to a neighbouring school to mine because I to quote “looked different” (white kid in a black area). I don’t think the principal scolding them would have done anything to prevent it and wouldn’t want kids to have to deal with that at school consistently. It’s all about areas but some high schools have full on gang activity going on and teaching staff shouldn’t be expected to act as law enforcement.
Fair enough, and that's consistent with what I've said elsewhere in this thread:
It’s because we didn’t have the ever-complaining parents school staff has to deal with now.
It's not just ever-complaining parents. There's also ever-complaining politicans, ever-complaining communities, ever-complaining social media lookiloos. Toss in a handful of grifting and self promotion and I don't blame the schools for not wanting to play the ' do we get hit with the million dollar suck stick '. I do blame the teachers for not realizing that someone needed to hold authority in a school full of little half developed people.
When you were young, there's a good chance school staff were allowed to discipline students, make physical contact to the extent needed to break up fights, remove privileges in response to bad behaviour, attach grade penalties, fail students, and so fourth. We live in a different world right now. Schools rely on the police because they know it's the least likely means to attract a lawsuit, let alone a press or social media campaign naming and defaming school personnel as racist, transphobic, sexist, homophobic, bullies, ableist, xenophobic, etc.
Having police in school is a net negative when it comes to intervention. Cops apply the law, that's their job.
They will criminalize any situations instead of finding alternate program that allows a kid to change their behaviour instead of destroying their lives with criminal charges
I take it you aren't indigenous, or other visible minority then?
Visible minority here, went to high school in one of the worse parts of GTA. I felt safe when cops were present. The only ones that didn't felt safe were the ones that were stealing or dealing something.
Indigenous men commits close to 30% of all murders in Canada. I’m certain there are major systemic issues that cause such insane statistics but to say that police are being racist instead of just responding to areas with high crime rates is inaccurate. The people that are victims are also indigenous and they deserve to be protected.
Just a reminder that when Doug Ford’s own Ministry of Education appointed a supervisor and took over the Peel District School Board in 2020, one of the first things they did was to remove cops from schools. Have any reporters asked the government about this flip flop, or like speed cameras is Ford just allowed to decide the narrative on every issue?
It appears that decision was made by Peel Regional Police in consultation with the interim director of education, who was indeed appointed by the provincial supervisor. There does not appear to be any evidence that anyone at the political level was involved in suspending Peel's SRO program, which is as it should be.
I don't think it's accurate to describe this as a flip flop. Rather, I think it's yet another example of the Ford government interfering—albeit belatedly—in local decisions they don't like. Frankly, I think that's worse than any flip-flop.
The Ministry directly controlled PDSB during that period, which is the template they’ve now applied to several other boards. The school board trustees and director of education had no real power. The MoE supervisor would not have autonomy to do whatever they wanted, they were acting on behalf of the government. Whether you want to consider that “political influence” or not is more or less semantics.
If their hand picked supervisor went through with this move then either a) they aren’t paying attention to what the supervisors are doing, which directly contradicts their stated reasoning for needing to take over boards, or b) they approved of it. Either way, it’s a legitimate question to ask the government. The Queen’s Park press galley consistently lets Ford push them around and get away with framing every issue however he wants. It’s a large part of the reason for why he’s been able to escape every scandal that pops up and it’s been like this since the pandemic.
(Edited a typo)
Well, again, this appears to have been a police-led operational decision.
Having said that, you'll get no argument from me that these are questions worth asking.
The whole point of appointing a supervisor is to have a day-to-day manager so you, the guy above the supervisor, need not focus on the day-to-day minutae. And we're talking about 2020, a time where yes, whether cops were or were not in schools was about number 82,000 on the list of priorities for the government.
That aside, I agree with your comments about the lack of substantive journalism by the press gallery (a gripe that extends beyond Queen's Park and beyond Ontario).
No, reporting in Ontario is somehow just the worst. Same thing happened with the speed cams
Personally happy to hear this. I know many teachers don’t like it but my wife is a teacher. She is in a school that has many problem students where violence is a real concern and safety issue. Can’t see how having some adults who are actually allowed to physically stop kids from being violent is a bad thing.
Don’t disagree but they won’t be in a he school only for events such as career day or sports. Yes teachers have it hard and you’re right there where Ford should be placing the Police…..but he’s not sadly.
It’s a start at least. I don’t think Ford is to blame for police being banned. As the article states its school boards and teachers who are against it.
This seems like very good news, getting rid of the SRO was a terrible problem pushed by ideologically extreme school boards, and it's good to see the provincial government retake control over this.
Most people I know only had good memories of the program, and it's opponents were engaged in criminal activity. Why should a small activist fringe be allowed to make things worse for everyone.
Not all opponents were engaged in criminal activities, especially if you were a person of African or Caribbean descent. While I'm in favour of this change, I think it important to note why there is pushback.
Does this mean you support them being stationed in Branksome Hall or Crestwood Prep?
I'm fairly confident that the people at those types of schools have no problems with SROs, and infact have police that can come to the school on demand. But that's not the problem here, rich schools are unaffected by the lack of SROs because there are less problem students. The removal of SROs mainly negatively affected students in poorer districts
I dunno man, I don't recall hearing about kids in any public school getting sodomized with a broomstick.
Why wouldn't he/she/they?
You don’t think they don’t have private security?
Why would that matter? If you force police into one schools, all schools should have the same policies in place. To do otherwise is discriminatory.
Why? Private schools by definition have different policies from public ones. And most of the private schools wouldn’t turn down cops they just isn’t a need and it wouldn’t be a good use of public funds.
Based on statistics, there is just as many assaults and sexual assaults, just as much drug use, etc. in those schools. Why is it only the rich who have privately owned security to cover up things?
Not really, cops are not in every public school, usually just the ones with the most violent incidents. Does the private owned security cover things up? Police in schools is more relationship building vs investigating etc
Given the number of class action lawsuits against these sorts of schools, where all the effort was into protecting the reputation of the institution instead of protecting the children in their care, yes. Privately owned security does cover things up for the people who sign their paycheques.
Why wouldn’t they be class action lawsuits, everyone who attends is wealthy enough to hire lawyers? Ofc an organization is going to try to protect their rep when faced with a lawsuit. That’s why we have neutral third parties to deal with this - government, justice system.
Again, the purpose of police in schools is being a liaison for the schools and building relationships with students. Not every public school has uniformed police liaisons, most dont. Most private schools would also love to have uniformed police and the parents would love that too. But it wouldn’t be a good use of public funds.
The lawsuits are because the school covered things up instead of taking action to prevent more abuse.
That program was only as good as the cops sent to a given school were. Some were great, others were bigoted assholes who had severe prejudices against nonwhite students
[citation needed]
It wasn’t just a “small activist fringe” supposedly making things worse for everyone. The program was shuttered because countless students had horrid experiences with the school resource officers, and were justifiably angry about it.
Yourself and the people you know are not a representative sample of everyone’s experiences.
The same logic also applies to the opponents. The decision to remove the program was not based on findings derived from data, but from the whims of semi-accountable ideologues.
According to the article we are commenting on, you are wrong. They actually gathered data through surveys, which would be far more representative. Additionally, they do not claim it is a majority of students who have issues with the officers, but rather a sizeable minority.
Thank you for reaffirming my view.
You may be confused about the concept of a representative sample. These two quotes are not at odds.
A representative sample is required to get an accurate estimate, unlike an informal survey of the people one person talks to. A sizeable minority being impacted by something is reason enough to act on it. A sizeable minority wouldn’t be 5%, it would be more like 30%. We often make decisions/rules/laws based on a sizeable minority.
A measure (30%) that becomes a target ceases to become a useful measure. Surveys are notoriously vulnerable to doctoring for a desired outcome, so please excuse my skepticism. I'm sure this number was met by phrasing the questions.
I'm so goddamn frustrated at people expecting teachers to deal with disruption, let alone violence ("bullying" tee hee, it's not a serious crime if it's a child) and theft.
If you don't want SROs, advocate for an alternative. Pulling them and expecting teachers to deal with the fallout on top of everything else is horseshit. This is causing far more harm than good, based on the evidence of people's eyes and ears. The command to disregard those will be disobeyed.
What makes you think there is a target for the measure?
The irony of claiming that collected data can be biased and therefore we should rely on bias without any data is crazy. Where is the evidence of the value of officers in schools? Is there data that shows whether they actually have a tangible impact on bullying, theft, and violence?
The cop at my school was great and definitely had a positive impact on most students, may racialized students included. If my experience were universal, keeping cops in schools would be a no brainer. However, I simply would not assume that my experience is universal without any evidence and in fact with evidence to the contrary.
If “white students aren’t harassed by racist cops” reaffirms your view that they aren’t a problem, that says more about you.
I'm sure it would, and thank you for your hypothetical. I'll be sure to call out the person who believes that the next time I encounter them.
Calling everyone on the other side of an issue an ideologically extreme criminal doesn't exactly establish you as a voice of reason here.
[removed]
Removed for rule 3: please keep submissions and comments substantive.
This is a reminder to read the rules before posting or commenting again in CanadaPolitics.
[removed]
Whether or how a SRO program should be offered seems like precisely the sort of decision that should be made at a more local level, by school boards that are familiar with and responsive to the unique concerns of their communities.
Having said that, I do think it’s petty af to bar uniformed police officers from attending their children’s career days.
I don’t see a need for this in 90% of schools. Maybe a rotation thing where they are at one school in the morning, one after recess and one in the afternoon walking around and making their presence known. In schools with issues maybe sure. Or just park a cop car there in the morning that kids will see when they walk in and then think twice about doing something.
No, not having the same officer stationed long-term defeats the purpose entirely. It's to make them part of the school community, a familiar presence to the kids, like a teacher or a counselor, someone that they feel comfortable speaking to about issues which may lead to prevention of worse things happening. They're not meant to a crime deterrent like you're suggesting, because the vast majority of kids aren't criminals, and just them occasionally being there as a faceless cop won't make kids want to talk to them.
In practice they usually end up intimidating the children on the regular though. The cops have one tool for all solutions and its treating people like criminals. This is very apparent every single time an rcmp is called to do a wellness check and they assault the person.
Yea, because both parties are basically strangers to each other. The whole point of having an officer stationed long-term is so that they AREN'T strangers. Also, the people that require wellness checks from the RCMP are more often than not people with issues, why else would they need the police to do wellness checks? Completely different from the average school kid.
Police officers are people too, and making them a part of the community is a benefit to them and to the community.
They purposely remove themselves from community, and undermine grassroots movements. They aren't part of the community by their own actions