Need you guys to clear something up for me...
OK I need to know if I'm going nuts or if someone is just painfully stupid.. so please interpret the following exchange and vote on the meaning...
Person A: "That's the third time you've accused me of getting my research from the media.
This will be the third time I'll reiterate that my arguments largely mirror those of various police groups.
I fail to understand why that is difficult for you to grasp.
Rhetorical device, I guess."
Person B: "Not your research, your opinions. I could care less where you claim to get your bogus "research." I find it impossible to believe you "thought up" your opinions on your own. Why? because no one who actually THINKS could possibly come to the insanely stupid conclusions you have spewed so far in this thread."
Person A: "I have no idea what this means. Not only do police groups largely not conduct research, their entire existence is for backing policy proposals. So you're wrong in about every way you can be wrong.
You do know that, right? That police groups regularly, routinely, comprehensively offer policy proposals?
That means they've developed opinions. Largely on their own experience and the backs of existing research that other people performed.
The research I've pointed to all thread is based on the same research that police groups rely on, and my proposals to policy are almost identical to what they've been pushing for decades.
Separate thy head from thy ass."
Person B: "You are too ****ing stupid to even have a discussion with. I am getting tired of having to dumb down every ****ing post so that you can follow along."
OK, now was Person B trying to say:
that police groups aren't offering opinions, they're conducting research
that Person A gets his opinions from the media