It means police officers [and I don’t know why I have to say this, but not 100% of all police officers] quite possibly could sit at polling places and harass people.
Cool since you admit it’s not 100%… Then call 911. My original statement doesn’t change. The Officers who aren’t part of the 0.01% that’s a problem can deal with it. Calling an 800 number will not change anything.
Edit: Maybe now with that curt response you can see how your statement could only be taken in such a way and why I responded why I did.
You asked a question, I answered it. I’m not sure why you’re so angry about it. Don’t ask questions if you don’t want them answered. The answer “quite possibly” applies to that question regardless of the context of the discussion.
Why are you attributing some emotion to text? Why is it that you can’t answer something in context and instead just need to inflame some anti-cop nonsense when you know damn well the answer is basically “that’s not happening, except in very very rare cases”?
I’m not mad, I don’t give a shit. I’m just tired of seeing obvious nonsense. Claiming that you can’t call 911 cause cops will be a cause of that is literally nonsense. That is the insinuation and you’re furthering it.
I don’t give a shit. I’m just tired of seeing obvious nonsense.
Sorry, it can’t be both.
and instead just need to inflame some anti-cop nonsense
I was, again, literally answering your question. I know you want to put words in my mouth or act like you knew what I was really doing, but I was still just answering the question:
Where do you think police are sitting at polling places harassing people?
To which the answer, ignoring the terrible grammar, is, “quite possibly.”
And it will continue to be “quite possibly” no matter how vociferously argue that you don’t actually care.
Cool since you admit it’s not 100%… Then call 911. My original statement doesn’t change. The Officers who aren’t part of the 0.01% that’s a problem can deal with it. Calling an 800 number will not change anything.
Edit: Maybe now with that curt response you can see how your statement could only be taken in such a way and why I responded why I did.
I was responding to this, hence my replying directly to it explicitly about what it said:
That’s you, right? It looks like your username.
Because the answer is still “quite possibly.”
I know you know how threads work. There is context before that post. You should read it.
You asked a question, I answered it. I’m not sure why you’re so angry about it. Don’t ask questions if you don’t want them answered. The answer “quite possibly” applies to that question regardless of the context of the discussion.
Why are you attributing some emotion to text? Why is it that you can’t answer something in context and instead just need to inflame some anti-cop nonsense when you know damn well the answer is basically “that’s not happening, except in very very rare cases”?
I’m not mad, I don’t give a shit. I’m just tired of seeing obvious nonsense. Claiming that you can’t call 911 cause cops will be a cause of that is literally nonsense. That is the insinuation and you’re furthering it.
Sorry, it can’t be both.
I was, again, literally answering your question. I know you want to put words in my mouth or act like you knew what I was really doing, but I was still just answering the question:
To which the answer, ignoring the terrible grammar, is, “quite possibly.”
And it will continue to be “quite possibly” no matter how vociferously argue that you don’t actually care.