Consider the following premises. For all x_17, if x_17 were fast, then x_17 is a scientist. For all x_17, if x_17 were a scientist, then x_17 is a police officer. For all x_17, x_17 is a scientist or x_17 is not poor. There is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not an electrician or x_17 is poor. For all x_17, x_17 is not a writer or x_17 is fast. For all x_17, x_17 is an electrician or x_17 is a writer. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all x_17, x_17 is not a police officer.
 From the fact that for all x_17, x_17 is a scientist or x_17 is not poor we can infer that for all x_17, if x_17 were poor, then x_17 is a scientist via universal rewriting. From the fact that for all x_17, x_17 is an electrician or x_17 is a writer, and that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not an electrician or x_17 is poor we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is a writer or x_17 is poor via existential resolution. From the fact that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is a writer or x_17 is poor, and that for all x_17, x_17 is not a writer or x_17 is fast we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is poor or x_17 is fast via existential resolution. From the fact that for all x_17, if x_17 were poor, then x_17 is a scientist, that for all x_17, if x_17 were fast, then x_17 is a scientist, and that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is poor or x_17 is fast we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is a scientist via existential disjunction elimination. Finally, from the fact that for all x_17, if x_17 were a scientist, then x_17 is a police officer, and that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is a scientist we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is a police officer via existential modus ponens, which contradicts that For all x_17, x_17 is not a police officer. Therefore, the answer is no.