Both work. A cop killer can be killer of cops or a killer who happens to also be a cop. I like it over killer cop for two reasons
it implies that the killer part is the essence and the cop part is external to that
it replaces a term meant to set apart a category of killers for being worse because they kill cops (as if “blue lives matter” more than all others) with the many times more common killer that’s worse for being a cop.
It’s nice that you like your way and all, but the phrase ‘cop killer’ has a long standing accepted meaning in the English language. You are simply wrong here.
Standard isn’t automatically the only correct usage of a word or phrase. As long as it makes sense and is understandable, it’s correct enough. Live a little.
I explained concisely but thoroughly what I meant and the logic made sense. Regardless, ignorance doesn’t enter into a deliberate subversion of conventions.
You’re just being a crotchety prescriptivist and/or doubling down because you don’t want to admit you’re wrong. YOU be better.
While word salad is a lovely side dish to serve with total bullshit none of us is eating what you’re serving up. Your writing smells like a 14 year old’s attempt at intellectual edgy. Chat GPT come up with that for you? Your generation was supposed to be creative and interesting. You are proving yourself to be lazy and boring. Trying to impress strangers on the Internet. How lame can you get?
Dude, chill already. I’m just using language creatively and calmly explaining my reasons for doing so and how it’s a perfectly normal thing to do rather than categorically wrong and an assault on the language itself. Nothing “edgy” about that.
Btw, your assumptions are not only extremely ageist, they’re also flat out wrong on every count: I’m 40, not 14, you’re the one being intellectually lazy and boring by stubbornly sticking to an ultra-strict interpretation of etymology, and I’ve never used ChatGPT for anything, let alone for explaining to a blowhard like you how language can be flexible 😂
Seems you’re right about being vanilla, but top shelf? Not so much 🙄
Language is flexible, but it’s not a contortionist. You ran into the room claiming red was now blue because you said so and that’s not how anything works. At forty you should know better. Instead, you choose to obfuscate and avoid and hide behind isms and stay wrong. That’s cool.
Perhaps killer cops would have been a better phrase.
Both work. A cop killer can be killer of cops or a killer who happens to also be a cop. I like it over killer cop for two reasons
it implies that the killer part is the essence and the cop part is external to that
it replaces a term meant to set apart a category of killers for being worse because they kill cops (as if “blue lives matter” more than all others) with the many times more common killer that’s worse for being a cop.
It’s nice that you like your way and all, but the phrase ‘cop killer’ has a long standing accepted meaning in the English language. You are simply wrong here.
Standard isn’t automatically the only correct usage of a word or phrase. As long as it makes sense and is understandable, it’s correct enough. Live a little.
Except that what you said was not understood as you intended. Entertaining willful ignorance is not 'living a little '. Be better.
I explained concisely but thoroughly what I meant and the logic made sense. Regardless, ignorance doesn’t enter into a deliberate subversion of conventions.
You’re just being a crotchety prescriptivist and/or doubling down because you don’t want to admit you’re wrong. YOU be better.
While word salad is a lovely side dish to serve with total bullshit none of us is eating what you’re serving up. Your writing smells like a 14 year old’s attempt at intellectual edgy. Chat GPT come up with that for you? Your generation was supposed to be creative and interesting. You are proving yourself to be lazy and boring. Trying to impress strangers on the Internet. How lame can you get?
Dude, chill already. I’m just using language creatively and calmly explaining my reasons for doing so and how it’s a perfectly normal thing to do rather than categorically wrong and an assault on the language itself. Nothing “edgy” about that.
Btw, your assumptions are not only extremely ageist, they’re also flat out wrong on every count: I’m 40, not 14, you’re the one being intellectually lazy and boring by stubbornly sticking to an ultra-strict interpretation of etymology, and I’ve never used ChatGPT for anything, let alone for explaining to a blowhard like you how language can be flexible 😂
Seems you’re right about being vanilla, but top shelf? Not so much 🙄
Language is flexible, but it’s not a contortionist. You ran into the room claiming red was now blue because you said so and that’s not how anything works. At forty you should know better. Instead, you choose to obfuscate and avoid and hide behind isms and stay wrong. That’s cool.