Then you should ask the “Victoria police, three area municipalities, and the Esquimalt and Songhees First Nations have all vocally opposed the decision, citing concerns about gang violence, drugs and sextortion.” directly what lives they have lived to be opposed to the removal of the program instead of ignorantly using subjective evidence to justify the programs removal.
Bizarre. So most of the dispute was over police presence inside schools. I don’t know what kind of life these parents who want police inside schools lived as kids, but almost all of my friends who had any sort of interaction with this kind of program say they got more trauma than any kind of meaningful assistance.
This is how you get kids to grow up thinking that addiction is a moral failure. How about we bring a priest into the mix too?
Addiction is not a moral failure but opposing measures that work to prevent addiction, gang violence, and sex crimes against children is.
Then you should ask […] what lives they have lived to be opposed to the removal of the program instead of ignorantly using subjective evidence to justify the programs removal.
I don’t need to ask because this one I can infer by myself 🤷🏽 there’s an assumption that these programs are in fact bringing significant results in “preventing addiction, gang violence, and sex crimes against children” when in truth, the evidence for these benefits is also subjective evidence ignorantly waved around.
If you’re able to connect the dots, the question I’m asking is exactly that. What kind of lives leads someone to believe on these alleged benefits. The other kind of life, the life that leads someone to not blindly believe that polices on schools is a good thing, I already know, I lived it myself.
I don’t need to ask because this one I can infer by myself 🤷🏽 there’s an assumption that these programs are in fact bringing significant results in “preventing addiction, gang violence, and sex crimes against children” when in truth, the evidence for these benefits is also subjective evidence ignorantly waved around.
The evidence that I can find from a Canadian source is one study done over two years in the Peel region. Based on what I can find from that study the practice is a promising one to help prevent children being harmed. It found that bullying was reduced, students felt less stressed, skipped school less, performed better over all, Female students felt safer, drug use and alcohol was reduced, crime reductions, and social benefits were also observed.
Yes this is one study, but we cannot verify the results if we do not implement the program as they have and study the outcomes in our school districts. If even half of the benefits come from half of the projected value in dollars it would be a positive program to implement across the province.
If you’re able to connect the dots, the question I’m asking is exactly that. What kind of lives leads someone to believe on these alleged benefits. The other kind of life, the life that leads someone to not blindly believe that polices on schools is a good thing, I already know, I lived it myself.
It isn’t about you, your feelings, or your life. It isn’t about the lives lived to lead someone to think this is beneficial. It is about a program that has been demonstrated to have positive outcomes being removed without studying the outcomes of the programs already in place while numerous groups oppose the decision. This should have been done properly and it wasn’t.
Then you should ask the “Victoria police, three area municipalities, and the Esquimalt and Songhees First Nations have all vocally opposed the decision, citing concerns about gang violence, drugs and sextortion.” directly what lives they have lived to be opposed to the removal of the program instead of ignorantly using subjective evidence to justify the programs removal.
Addiction is not a moral failure but opposing measures that work to prevent addiction, gang violence, and sex crimes against children is.
I don’t need to ask because this one I can infer by myself 🤷🏽 there’s an assumption that these programs are in fact bringing significant results in “preventing addiction, gang violence, and sex crimes against children” when in truth, the evidence for these benefits is also subjective evidence ignorantly waved around.
If you’re able to connect the dots, the question I’m asking is exactly that. What kind of lives leads someone to believe on these alleged benefits. The other kind of life, the life that leads someone to not blindly believe that polices on schools is a good thing, I already know, I lived it myself.
The evidence that I can find from a Canadian source is one study done over two years in the Peel region. Based on what I can find from that study the practice is a promising one to help prevent children being harmed. It found that bullying was reduced, students felt less stressed, skipped school less, performed better over all, Female students felt safer, drug use and alcohol was reduced, crime reductions, and social benefits were also observed.
Yes this is one study, but we cannot verify the results if we do not implement the program as they have and study the outcomes in our school districts. If even half of the benefits come from half of the projected value in dollars it would be a positive program to implement across the province.
It isn’t about you, your feelings, or your life. It isn’t about the lives lived to lead someone to think this is beneficial. It is about a program that has been demonstrated to have positive outcomes being removed without studying the outcomes of the programs already in place while numerous groups oppose the decision. This should have been done properly and it wasn’t.