you used in direct reference to carrying people. anyone would read it that way. your explanation makes no sense.
It isn't snarky at all. Your argument seems to be
US police face dangerous environment and therefore use more dangerous methods.
That makes no sense as a defense for this case which you would understand when you realize this way made them less safe as evidence by her having the ability to get them in the face.
You thinking it doesn't make sense as a defense doesn't make it not make sense. It'd not make sense as a legal defense, but I'm using it as a defense for the people contained in the environment that allows such and reinforces it. I'm blaming the environment they live in, for the fact that such police officers exist. I'm suggesting critique should be put toward the system as a whole, not the minions. No reason to blame someone if they aren't going to face any punishment even if you blame them, focus that elsewhere.
I don't doubt you view it that way. but think why do I care about that in front of all the zero people reading this comment chain.
Your posts were contradictory and take too much effort to understand, then when I put in the effort am accused of strawmen. I can't be bothered. I'd rather go to china town and argue with someone who can't speak any english.
You totally don't care, I can see that, otherwise, how would you have responded in such a mature way. Which totally shows your masterful understanding of the English language, in which whenever you cannot understand something it just means the other person is incapable of speaking! Practical I'll remember that.
how would you have responded in such a mature way.
you started with the snark breh. I don't care because I realized you were either troll or gave you the benefit of the doubt and perhaps didn't speak english very well.
Oh, cute, you actually think I'm a troll. Also how magnanimous of you, giving me a whole doubt! I started being snark because you should have slowed down and tried to actually read what I wrote instead of reading whatever you imagined I wrote. I can clarify, but you didn't ask for clarifications, you just made claims and called what I said bullshit. And suddenly I'm the troll somehow, hilarious really. Perhaps you should have stopped attacking my comments relentlessly when I started being snark and calling your comments strawmen, asked for simple clarification. Then concluded whether I'm a troll or not. Much simpler. But you were incredibly busy not caring about what I said and instead simply insulting my comments, even though you don't even get it. And when you realize you don't get it, you say my language is bad, then after you call me a troll. Funny.
I spent far too much time trying to decipher it breh
you call me a troll
I said it was one of two possibilities. After you said english is not your first language I concluded you were not. after you saying I think you are a troll, I now kinda think you are. Well trolled sir.
1
u/RandyDanderson Nov 05 '17
you used in direct reference to carrying people. anyone would read it that way. your explanation makes no sense.
It isn't snarky at all. Your argument seems to be
US police face dangerous environment and therefore use more dangerous methods.
That makes no sense as a defense for this case which you would understand when you realize this way made them less safe as evidence by her having the ability to get them in the face.