1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Esperanto
  4. >
  5. "Ĉu la polico helpas nin?"

"Ĉu la polico helpas nin?"

Translation:Do the police help us?

June 12, 2015



I have been arrested (wrongly) and my life has been saved by police. My child was lost overnight (in a Colorado autumn) and found by a policeman someplace we had never known to look.

Police can be hindrances, and they can be lifesavers. Never use a single word response to such a nuanced question.

[deactivated user]

    Yeah, keeping criminals from doing crime! How dare they!


    Edgy, stunning and brave!


    Do you prefer high or low boots? Ya know, for licking


    Bona kanto, tamen. Mi amas la version "4-Skins".


    Ĉiuj policanoj estas viraĉoj


    Ĉu ankaŭ la virinoj?


    Wow you're so intelligent, let's all 100% hate every single member of the police no matter the situation or context!!!


    No, let's not. Respect those who work under the law, and disrespect those who feel themselves above it, and don't hate anybody.


    Ne, ili ne helpas nin.


    Why is correct "Do the police...?" like "Does the police...?" ? Why Do and Does are correct? 3 persons --> Does, ĉu ne?


    Both of them are correct since "police" is both plural and singular since it can be thought of as the organization as a whole or the people who make it up, although some believe that "police" should only be plural when used by itself. Equally correct examples: The police are bad vs. The police is bad and The police arrest criminals vs The police arrests criminals


    "Police" is singular in the UK and plural in the US


    Police is a collective noun, not a plural. "Police Officer" is the singular. Nobody in the UK would say "a police".


    But in the US one might say "a policeman" or "a police officer." But still say "the police are here" even if it's only one person.


    Nobody likes the police until they need them.


    All the times that I've needed them, they've been useless.

    When my ❤❤❤❤ got stolen, they didn't get it back even when we knew who stole it. When my ex's ex broke a window, the cops just told me to shoot him if he came through the door. Cops watched me get shot because they were afriad to stop some dude who was starting fights with people.

    Cops do not help, and they don't actually have to https://youtu.be/jAfUI_hETy0


    Black Lives Matter Negraj Vivoj Gravas


    Bonvolu ne moki aŭ ĝeni la aliajn lernantojn. Ili fieras, ke ili mem povas traduki frazon aŭ aforismon. Memoru, ke vi nur ŝajnas esti kuraĝulo ĉi tie kie neniu vere konas vin.


    Unfortunately, it's an increasingly relevant question lately


    Estas iom da fundamentaj problemoj en nia metodo por trejni policistojn, sed krome ili jes ja helpas nin. Sekureco ne eblas sen la polico.


    Would "Can the police help us" work?


    I think that would need a povas in there someplace.


    As FredCapp mentioned, that would be more like this:

    Ĉu la polico povas helpi nin?


    I think that "polico" designates the institution whereas "policisto" designates the police officer. Am I wrong?


    Vi preskaŭ pravas. Ni plej ofte uzas policanon.


    I am not sure this is correct. I looked into it a while back and was very surprised to find out that, in the literature anyway, usage is split between policisto and policano. PIV lists both as equivalent.

    In contrast, I remember using the word doganano, which I consider analogous, but the person I was speaking to paused for a moment and then repeated doganisto.

    So, I would not have corrected Romain770432 here.



    I think you are not wrong, because the suffix -IST conveys the idea of a professional.


    It's a profession.


    What are you trying to say? The only sense I can make of your comment is that you got lost in CelioFM's double negative "not wrong."


    Ili provas helpi nin.


    Too real for 2020.


    ToO rEaL fOr 20@0


    Lol, ACAB though


    Is the police helping us - accepted


    En teorio? Jes. En apliki? Ne.


    Yes, if you are not black


    Kompreneble, jes, ĉar ili helpas plisekurigi nin.


    gxis dependas sur la lando kaj la registaro.


    Good question. Most of the world, jes. En usono, ne.


    Ne si vi estas nigris


    Ne se oni estas negrulo.

    I think that fixes the grammar. The other, more profound, problem will take an effort from us all.


    Yes, the do help. They risk their lives doing it as well, no matter how ungrateful people become.


    They are only as honest as the people who are paying them.


    Hi Stephie, I would expect that your comment has more positive than negative votes. How knows why it's like this.


    They do help but they're paid to help by theives and they also are willing to kill over a few ounces of a plant


    They risk their lives enforcing horrible mind controling policies. The fact that DMT the spirit molecule is illegal should show you the state of things. That molecule is in your brain right now, yet people are locked up for life for it.


    The fact you talk about DMT, yet you still feel like it's okay to generalize people like the police, then it tells me you haven't smoked enough DMT.


    It's a psychedlic drug that makes you see visions and stuff. It breaks apart your ego making you feel like you are one with everything and that we are all the same.

    Basically what I'm saying, is if this dude does DMT, I would be surprised. It gives you a new perspective of understanding when you go through an experiment like that.

    Him grouping police together like they are all the same person is the exact opposite of anything DMT could teach you.


    Ok, thanks. I'm not a native English speaker, so when I saw DTM my first thought was that it's some abbreviation for the police, something like NYPD.


    bluaj vivoj gravas


    Ĉielarkaj vivoj gravas


    Ĉiom vivoj gravas.




    Bluaj vivoj … Ĉu Smurfoj?


    Sed "Nigraj vivoj" parolas pri raso. Afero kie oni ne havas elekton. Policanoj ĉiam havis elekton, kaj ilia raso ne estas blua. Do, esti honesta, la "Bluaj vivoj" devas esti aŭ non sequitor aŭ iuj nehomaj. i.e. Smurfoj.


    Imagine being downvoted by saying that someone's lives matters on a platform which claims to be all about acceptance.


    Non sequiturs matter.


    Are we in a TV show where we sprout random classical fallacies like they are some sort of chants in Latin because it sounds cool?


    For me "non sequitur" is not just a "classical fallacy" but has been part of my regular daily vocabulary before I knew that fallacies existed as a category (e.g. I learned much later in life what a "straw man argument" was - and don't get me started on "de gustibus"!)

    EaterofPumpkin probably could have gotten a better response if s/he had posted in support of police that didn't sound so much like a reference to another popular slogan which seems to ruffle a lot of feathers for some reason.

    I don't think this reflects either way on "acceptance."


    Serious question - if non sequitur is a random Latin phrase, how do you say "non sequitur" in English?


    terrible indeed

    Sorry. I deleted my post before I saw you replied. I normally would have typed "asdf" and then deleted it, but since you said "hack the horrible UI" I typed "horrible" -- except I was thinking "terrible" instead of horrible. My bad.

    I'll probably delete this comment too.


    I'd reword the idea into something that's more like a casual conversation and not a formal debate. Especially when jumping into a random reply on a forum where the discourse is usually on the level of "y my answr not accept", "this word funny lol" or "lingots pl0x".

    So, to answer the question: I'd probably say something along the lines of "I don't see where you've drawn that conclusion from" to a stranger and "did you just pull that outta your ass?" to a friend or on a forum with less censorship and speech control.


    But for me "non sequitur" is indeed something that you use in a casual conversation. When Jonathan the Turtle-Loving Zombie said "I like turtles" it was a non sequitur - but that was live from Waterfront Village, not a formal debate.

    "I don't see where you've drawn that conclusion from"

    Except, that's explicitly not what I meant. What I meant is that when someone replies "blue lives matter", it's like saying "I like turtles". Nobody was talking about turtles. Nobody was talking about the police.

    "did you just pull that outta your ass?"

    That's also NOT what "non sequitur" means. I suppose I could have said:

    Changing the subject matters

    There's really no reason - ever - to say "Blue Lives Matter." Note that this doesn't mean that their lives don't matter -- but as you suggested, this idea would be so easy to simply rephrase.

    • Police have a difficult job.
    • My life is better thanks to the police.
    • The plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence"

    And so on.

    Learn Esperanto in just 5 minutes a day. For free.