Consider the following premises. For all y_3, if y_3 were a police officer, then y_3 is playing squash. For all y_3, if y_3 were fast, then y_3 is a police officer. For all y_3, if y_3 were a police officer, then y_3 is driving a car. For all y_3, y_3 will not play squash. For all y_3, if y_3 drives a car, then y_3 is fast. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one y_3 for which y_3 is fast.
 From the fact that for all y_3, if y_3 were a police officer, then y_3 is playing squash, and that for all y_3, y_3 will not play squash we can infer that for all y_3, y_3 is not a police officer. From the fact that for all y_3, if y_3 were a police officer, then y_3 is driving a car, and that for all y_3, if y_3 drives a car, then y_3 is fast we can infer that for all y_3, if y_3 were a police officer, then y_3 is fast. From the fact that for all y_3, if y_3 were a police officer, then y_3 is fast, and that for all y_3, if y_3 were fast, then y_3 is a police officer we can infer that for all y_3, y_3 is a police officer if and only if y_3 is fast. Finally, from the fact that for all y_3, y_3 is a police officer if and only if y_3 is fast, and that for all y_3, y_3 is not a police officer we can infer that for all y_3, y_3 is not fast, which contradicts that There is at least one y_3 for which y_3 is fast. Therefore, the answer is no.