Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com to THE POLICE PROBLEM@lemmy.worldEnglish · 7 days agoAmazonquokk.auimagemessage-square94linkfedilinkarrow-up1820arrow-down17file-text
arrow-up1813arrow-down1imageAmazonquokk.auViking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com to THE POLICE PROBLEM@lemmy.worldEnglish · 7 days agomessage-square94linkfedilinkfile-text
minus-squareprole@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·6 days agoLol oh that was the “witty snarky lemmy-ism”, but not your reply pretending that you thought they meant homeless people?
minus-squareim_fine_sandy@nord.publinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3arrow-down2·6 days agoMy reply about homeless people was pointing out the unintended consequences of their daft “tax payers” assertion. If that’s something you would describe as a witty or snarky response, that’s up to you I guess.
minus-squareprole@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down1·6 days agoOh fuck off, you know I’m right. You did the exact same thing you were criticizing.
minus-squareim_fine_sandy@nord.publinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·6 days agoOk ? I’m criticizing an idiot that said police shouldn’t protect people who don’t pay tax. Clearly a position they hadn’t really thought through.
Lol oh that was the “witty snarky lemmy-ism”, but not your reply pretending that you thought they meant homeless people?
My reply about homeless people was pointing out the unintended consequences of their daft “tax payers” assertion.
If that’s something you would describe as a witty or snarky response, that’s up to you I guess.
Oh fuck off, you know I’m right. You did the exact same thing you were criticizing.
Ok ?
I’m criticizing an idiot that said police shouldn’t protect people who don’t pay tax. Clearly a position they hadn’t really thought through.