For this weeks assignment, I read (on Rethinkingschools.org), "In the Wake of Uvalde, a Teacher's Plea for Police-Free Schools" by Nataliya Braginsky (read here) which was released in the Fall 2022 issue. I chose to read and discuss this article because it immediately caught my attention as I was scrolling through the archives. Police reform, attacks on schools and the relationship American society has with law enforcement have been very hotly debated topics in recent years, and I am no exception to wanting to hear and learn more.
3 Talking Points
1.) Braginsky's article uses the elementary school shooting in Uvalde as hook to bring readers into the article. The law enforcement response to the school shooting in Uvalde has been widely criticized due to their delayed response and inaction, and a recent report from the Department of Justice confirmed what most of us already knew - the delay in response that day came at a deadly cost. According to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said “Had law enforcement agencies followed generally accepted practices in an active shooter situation and gone right after the shooter to stop him, lives would have been saved and people would have survived,” (to read more about the DOJ report, read here ). The police response in Uvalde was clearly botched, and was not handled the way police response is expected to in what very unfortunately has become a far too common in American society: shootings in schools (mass shootings). By using the Uvalde shooting to bring up this topic, Braginsky takes the opionization that, "Like fellow educators responding to the Uvalde school shooting, I agree that now is the time for us to double down on calls for comprehensive gun reform. But that is not enough. Now is also the time for us to stand in solidarity with our students in the fight for police-free schools." But is this putting the cart before the horse? Police in schools are certainly not a guaranteed safety measure against gun violence, but until better, effective, controls are in place to reduce shootings in the first place, is removing this safety measure before that happens the best idea? What should be the priority?
2.) The knee jerk reaction in most communities is increased police presence in and around schools. According to Braginsky, in her own school district (New Haven, not far from us here in Rhode Island!), after the shooting in Uvalde, the New Haven mayor announced they would be increasing police presence in their schools, and she quotes Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) as stating shortly after Uvalde, “the most effective tool for keeping kids safe is armed law enforcement on the campus.” However, she counters with "what happened in Uvalde shows us that rather than actual protection, police provide the false illusion of safety." With a statement like this, I would interpret it as the police do not keep us safe, so our focus should be how do we keep ourselves and our students safe if they cannot help us? She states that "students and teachers, who sit at the center of this crisis as its primary victims, must be decision makers at the forefront of any societal response", I agree with that. What will not only make us feel safer in our schools, but actually make us safer in these conditions of being targeted? (It is mentioned in the article how there has been national discussion of allowing school staff to be armed, but this is completely opposed by both major teaching unions in the United States). Reforms on gun policies may be a huge help, but also why is there so much violence, and why is it being directed towards schools and children? I can't help but think, if someone wants to hurt others, and cause damage, they will find a way to do it, with or without guns, and that is truly the root of this problem - so how do we stay safe from that?
3.) "National studies have shown that the presence of police in schools leads to 3.5 times more arrests of youth, and in some states, as high as eight times more arrests. This approach criminalizes students for normal adolescent behavior ". This brought some questions to my mind when I read this. Obviously risk-taking behavior is very high during adolescence. It is a time of learning, growing and making mistakes, even science finds this to be true, the pre-frontal cortex which is responsible for decision-making doesn't fully develop until the mid-to late twenties (more information on this can be found here on the National Institute of Mental Health). However, there is a difference between "normal adolescent behavior" and arrestable offenses. I don't know how I feel about this aspect of the argument, having an officer present to catch the behavior and thus provide a punishment does not negate the fact that the behavior probably shouldn't be happening. It makes sense that having police in schools of course leads to increased arrests, there is someone to catch the behavior and arrest them for it. I would like to have seen more data to back up the statement " criminalizes students for normal adolescent behavior", for example what are the typical offenses/charges? This article was published in Fall 2022, and she mentions how there has already been strides in removing police presence of schools, however this article released in June 2023 by the New York Times discusses how many districts that pulled officers out schools over the last few years have been having to put them back in due to safety concerns and increases in crime, and while students of color are disproportionally subject to arrest, they are also disproportionally victims of crimes as well.
Argument Statement
This author, Nataliya Braginiski argues that schools need to be free of police, and that their presence actually increases as well as causes negative outcomes for students.
Connections
In our last in-person lecture, we discussed the dominant ideologies in the United States, some of them being "whiteness", "American-ness", "able-bodied-ness" and "maleness". Many of these ideologies and their influences are represented in this article. The "Right to Bear Arms" is very much an American ideology, associated with patriotism and freedom, and the passion to protect the 2nd Amendment and find any other solution to gun violence in this country instead of making any changes to that right can be directly associated with the ideology of "American-ness". The idea of arming teachers (as mentioned in the article) instead of disarming the public from automatic and semi-automatic weapons supports this as well. Police officers are typically white males ( US DOJ Law Enforcement Statistics ), not just stereotypically but the data also proves this, thus they represent the ideologies of "maleness" and "whiteness". The national studies that Braginski references say there is a direct correlation with increased arrests and police in schools, also state that "these arrests disproportionately target Black students and students with disabilities, both of whom are three times more likely to be arrested by school police than their white and non-disabled counterparts", thus again seemingly targeting those who note fit the ideals of "whiteness" and "ablebodied-ness".
No comments:
Post a Comment