- cross-posted to:
- seattle@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- seattle@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
But if we DONT have COPS who will
Prevent Crimes?Investigate Crimes?Stop Crimes?Arrest BLACK Children?They mean “fewer,” not “less.” Police are countable.
You mean unaccountable.
Clever!
Ok Stannis
nah they want 'em to be less fat too
Fun fact, you can see that this poster is for Seattle.
The police union has used its power to force the city to not allow more than about 24 responders on the “CARE” team, which is a team of non-police responders that are basically just well-equipped social workers with formal training that lets them incredibly effectively handle things like mental health emergencies, drug users, etc.
They then put additional restrictions in place to make it even harder for those people to get dispatched to a scene, such as if any drugs are visible at all, if the person is “confrontational”, if they’re in a building or car, or if there’s an “indication” they’ve committed any form of crime at all.
Dispatchers also can’t send the CARE team alongside police anymore.
The police don’t just do their jobs badly, they force the city to spend money on their high salary and high overtime wages to get worse results, instead of sending in actual professionals.
ACAB.
That wasn’t fun at all, that was bloody infuriating!
I’m all for this message, but the execution is bad in terms of actual advertising psychology. Most people will only glance at it for a mere moment, seeing a nice cop with a “you wanna be a cop?” and nothing more. This is the exact opposite of what the ad is trying to convey.
Start paying EMT’s like the pigs and maybe that’s a choice.
I never understood why EMTs were so close to minimum wage.
*fewer
My only thought reading this. Fewer cops, more people who can write properly.
Thank you. Personal pointless pet peeve.
You need to get hobbies IMO
Too true.
Don’t be a grammar cop.
You can do better, so can Seattle.
Less needless “corrections” that add nothing to conversations. More engaging in conversation
Less being a stickler for no good reason. More being chill for once
Less grammar cops Better communities
*fewer
Fewer people who care how language works.
More people who can’t speak their own language.Less people enforce arbitrary outdated “rules”
More people let language evolve like the living thing it is
Less people care about prescriptivism outside of formal contexts
More the language reflects reality rather than being left to stagnate and die
I actually agree with what you’ve written here, but not in this context. This IS a formal context where the recruitment poster in the image isn’t trying to be clever or interesting or funny, which are all valid contexts for different uses of established language rules, they’re just wrong. Additionally the OP comment here wasn’t being rude by offering the correct word for the context, I saw it as offering assistance to someone forming their sentence incorrectly.
It’s not a formal context, it’s very obviously written in a breezy and casual style, where attention-grabbing is more important than formalities
The call-response format is short-long in stressing, which gives it a PUNCH that “fewer” would lose as well
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Feels more punchy than
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Also, it’s not a recruitment poster, it’s a political advocacy poster.
Again I disagree with your assessment and assertions.
Ah yeah, I always use “wanna” in formal context, like all the time
If you’re speaking it natively and correctly to your own understanding, you’re not speaking it wrong, or unable to speak it. That assertion is asinine on its face. Languages change.
Not all change of language is good.
Read 1984 again if forgot why.
Read 1984 again if forgot why.
lol, there’s layers of irony in this line
Ah, you mean the book about a prescriptivist policy of grammar coming top-down from government, that one?
And how the way that people rebelled was intentionally misuse of the rules in a “you didn’t say I couldn’t use it this way!”, a form of descriptivism
Read 1984, if forget why
I fucken got stuck talking to a libertarian coworker yesterday who was all about negative enforcement. Dude truly believed we needed more punishment and more cops.
This is why you punch them and let them know you’re actually helping them by doing negative enforcement.
I cant punch him through Teams. I really wanted to.
Teams sucks. Been asking for a punch feature for years.
There’s a huge body of academic evidence showing that broadly policing is an ineffective intervention for crime. Including a huge study commissioned by the us government before the 84 crime bill.
That we then passed anyway.
Not just ineffective.
Cops are the biggest criminals I’ve seen.
Watch how many traffic rules they break.
Watch how often they breach their own policies, and wear treasonous gangsign badges to show allegiance to the gang, not to the public and their professed duty.
Last time I saw a couple cops, they had come to my house to tell me they were committing mail fraud, breach of duty of care, theft, dereliction of duty, and when I tried to report crimes to them, they then fled the crime scene.
Not the worst I’ve had from them…
Once, a gang of thugs broke into my home, tied me up, stole my medicine, and threatened to make me their prisoner for over a decade of being raped. And I could not call the cops on them, because they were the cops.
Still recovering(?) from the PTSD from that, 21 years ago. What a waste of human potential they cause.
Suggest they read more of the books around them.
less cop, less overbloated gang UNION/benefits funding. the top 2 require alot more education and certification(masters level) than a cop, emts are just super- under paid.
My IQ’s 30 points off from meeting the threshold to be a cop. :/
And thus that’d be a daily/constant trigger for my illithiophobia among my colleagues if I were to become one.
Nurses, Libraries, EMTs, yus, much better for the world.
