news-record.com

Watching video of the 15-year-old girl beaten down by a female attacker in Seattle while four uniformed security guards did nothing to help prompted a terrible thought:

What if that happened at a Guilford County school?

It doesn't seem far-fetched given the recent Board of Education discussions about removing school resource officers in favor of security guards. The Seattle scenario could play out here, too.

The violence there occurred at Seattle's bus terminal almost literally under the noses of security guards. King County Metro Transit hired a private security firm to patrol the terminal, but employees are under orders to "observe and report," a sheriff's department spokesman told ABC's "Good Morning America" Monday. "And that means be a good witness and call 911. And that's exactly what they did."

So, why call them "security" guards? Wouldn't "observers" be a more accurate name? But, then, that job has been superfluous since the invention of the video camera.

In the wake of the adverse publicity over this appalling incident, King County has assigned more officers to patrol the bus terminal, but that's a temporary salve. Authorities turned to a private security firm to save money in the first place, while providing the appearance of vigilance.

That could be the case in Guilford County if the board decides to remove SROs.

There are three issues driving the discussion, however, and only one is cost.

The second is Tasers, and the third is the view of some board members that SROs are making too many arrests.

It made for a lively exchange of views when the board met with Sheriff BJ Barnes, High Point police Chief Jim Fealy and Greensboro Assistant Chief Gary Hastings three weeks ago.

It's understandable that some board members aren't comfortable that SROs carry Tasers on the job, and have used them four times to subdue students. The law-enforcement leaders are adamant, however, on the point that SROs will carry the same equipment as every other officer under their command. The issue has become nonnegotiable.

As for the number of arrests, Barnes said officers have "a responsibility to take action" if they see a crime.

That's a fair point. The "security guards" at the Seattle bus terminal couldn't make an arrest. If a police officer had been present, the attacker presumably would have been arrested and charged with assault.

Would that mean the officer caused the arrest?

Still, critics also have a point when they recall days when the principal dealt with altercations between students without having anyone hauled off to juvenile detention. Maybe both sides should seek middle ground -- taking offenders to a "student court," for example.

But not in every instance.

Fealy recalled rushing to High Point Central High School a few years ago to find the principal, who had tried to break up a fight, being carried out on a stretcher and a scene in the cafeteria that resembled "a prison riot."

That school had an SRO on campus. The question for policymakers is whether, given the possibility of violence, they want a trained law-enforcement officer on the scene within moments, or a uniformed "observer."

Some security guards may have the training or experience to intervene in an altercation. But most work like those in Seattle, under orders not to take direct action. Getting in the middle of a fight between two high school students, or among many students, can be dangerous -- physically and legally. If a security guard in Seattle had pulled the attacker from her victim and injured her, he'd be the one facing charges.

When fights erupt in school, the first responders usually are teachers or other staff members. But they have to be very careful. My wife, who's a small woman, would have no business getting between combatants at her middle school. However, I have witnessed large, male teachers breaking up a fight.

That's exactly what a security guard ought to do, but do you want to count on that? And what happens in a more serious situation, perhaps if an armed intruder enters a school and threatens students? "Observe and report" isn't going to save anyone's life.

It would be a "colossal mistake" to replace law-enforcement officers with security guards, Fealy told the school board.

You'll get what you pay for, Barnes added.

Seattle taxpayers might wonder whether they even get what they pay for with "security guards" who simply watch as a 15-year-old girl is beaten down and kicked. Let's hope that never happens in Guilford County schools.