# Outrageous (or at least interesting) policy/law/rule loopholes that you have encountered **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 11, 2015, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736 "2015-03-11T01:35:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/1 "2015-03-11T01:35:13Z")
A loophole, of course, is an unanticipated (usually) effect of imperfections in written or otherwise established rules, where one is able to follow the letter of the law while violating its spirit and/or the intended purposes of the rule. For example, bars in many jurisdictions have added simple sandwich counters in the corner to get themselves legally reclassified as a restaurant and receive the more lenient regulatory treatment associated with family restaurants, even though almost nobody orders from the lunch counter and the establishment continues to operate effectively as a bar. Loopholes can also form because rules were not updated to keep pace with changing times (e.g. Section VII of the Statutes of the County Police Force, which was written in 1834 and never updated, says that “anyie Persone who hath completted Highh Schoolle shal be advanssed to supervissorie Ranke withoute delaie.” because in those days, being a high school graduate meant automatic admission to the cultural elite). What are some outrageous (or at least interesting) loopholes that you have taken advantage of, have been tempted to take advantage of, have known people who have taken advantage of, or at least have heard of in a meaningful sense (i.e. more than “I heard it on the internets”, but not necessarily requiring a formal citation). The more detail you can give, the better! Loopholes that still exist, that resulted in a significant benefit for little cost (e.g. [get out of jail free for passing a basic literacy test](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_of_clergy), promotions at work for goofing off and playing rules lawyer with the Employee Handbook, free academic degrees from a respected school for doing essentially nothing, unlimited free Cable TV for owning at least two chicken coops (yay Farmers’ Service Benefit Act of 1789!)), or that are particularly morally outrageous are obviously also a plus. The loopholes can be loopholes to any sort of meaningfully established set of rules - so civil law, criminal law, employer policy, school policy, or even the Red Handbook of the Eagles Club can be in scope. Try not to concentrate heavily on game rules (we could spend all day just talking about Dungeons and Dragons), but outrageous loopholes that have been encountered in college, Olympic, or professional sports are fine. This question does _not_ cover actual rulebreaking or techniques for avoiding getting caught when breaking rules. It refers to cases where the rules have been followed, but the effect is other than intended or desired by those who wrote, or could have changed, the rules. ---
**Author:** ![needscoffee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/needscoffee/32/1076_2.png) [@needscoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/needscoffee)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/2 "2015-03-11T06:21:01Z")
Can only think of a loophole with negative consequences. [Korsakoff’s Syndrome](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korsakoff%27s_syndrome), an amnesiac syndrome where people can’t remember beyond a short time period, a la “50 First Dates” - they forget anything they’ve learned within the last few minutes, is caused by B-1 vitamin deficiency, most often via severe alcohol abuse, which robs you of B-1. Fortifying booze with Vitamin B-1 would eliminate the main cause of this syndrome. According to US regulations, vitamins cannot be added to food without labeling the food as such. But other US regulations forbid labeling alcohol with anything that implies that it might be good for you. So there’s no way to add Vitamin B-1 to booze in the U.S. ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/3 "2015-03-11T09:32:22Z")
Two doozies from Ireland currently: 1. [Until midnight on Thursday, Class A drugs are legal (maybe)](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ireland-just-accidentally-legalised-ecstasy-ketamine-and-crystal-meth-10098612.html): > [@](#): > > In what it deemed a “constitutional issue of far-reaching importance”, the three-judge Court of Appeal unanimously declared a regulation making the possession of methylethcathinone (known as 4-Mec or Snow Blow) illegal now invalid, as the 1977 Act was being added to without consultation of the Oireachtas (Irish parliament). > > The Department of Health issued an explanatory memorandum saying that as a result of the judgement, “**all substances controlled by means of Government Orders made under section 2(2) cease to be controlled with immediate effect, and their possession ceases to be an offence**. These include ecstasy, benzodiazepines and new psychoactive substances, so-called ‘headshop drugs’”. > > Ecstasy refers to MDMA, while benzodiazepines include diazepam or ‘Valium’. > > **However, according to The Journal, the act has also been used to outlaw the possession of ketamine, magic mushrooms and other drugs.** A new law is being hastily passed to restore the status quo on a more constitutional basis. But it won’t come in to effect until midnight on Thursday, so… 1. [Heterosexual marriage may now be illegal (for Irish speakers)](http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-language-version-of-same-sex-vote-text-changed-1.2133577#.VP8XaPh7k0g.twitter): > [@](#): > > The Government has changed the Irish-language version of the wording of the same-sex marriage referendum because of a possibility that a marriage between a heterosexual couple might be found unconstitutional. > Taoiseach Enda Kenny confirmed on Tuesday the Irish-language version of the amendment has been changed to bring clarity to the amendment. > The decision was made at the weekly meeting of Cabinet, after Ministers received legal advice and also advice from Irish language experts. > The original Irish translation was: “Féadfaidh beirt, cibé acu is fir nó mná iad, conradh a dhéanamh i leith pósadh de réir dlí.” > Directly translated back into English it stated: “A couple may, whether they are men or women, make a contract of marriage in accordance with law.” > The use of the plural created a difficulty in that one interpretation of the wording was that it distinguished only between female couples and male couples, but not between same-sex and heterosexual couples. ---
**Author:** ![eclectic\_wench](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ac91a4/32.png) [@eclectic\_wench](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eclectic_wench)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/4 "2015-03-11T10:08:54Z")
At Trinity College, Ireland’s oldest university, you can [buy a Master’s degree](http://trinitynews.ie/criticism-of-masters-for-cash-scheme/). If you’ve done your BA there, you can give them a few hundred quid and they give you an MA. (The logic I heard is that, because Trinity’s BA takes four years while BAs at other universities in Ireland take only three, you’ve actually done the same amount of work as someone with an MA from University College Dublin, say…) > [@Stanislaus](#): > > Two doozies from Ireland currently: > > 1. [Until midnight on Thursday, Class A drugs are legal (maybe)](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ireland-just-accidentally-legalised-ecstasy-ketamine-and-crystal-meth-10098612.html): oontz oontz oontz ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/5 "2015-03-11T12:36:04Z")
Not exactly the same thing, but it is an unintended consequence. IIRC when Sweden legalised homosexuality in 1944 they also managed to legalise bestiality. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/6 "2015-03-11T12:43:15Z")
I know a bar that offers soup in order to satisfy the requirements of their restaurant license. They have cans of soup, bowls, and a microwave. However, nobody seems interested in paying $15 for nuked Campbell’s chicken noodle. Another bar got into hot water over advertising bottles of beer as “buy five get one free”. You can say “buy five get one for a penny”, but “free” is a violation. ---
**Author:** ![GrizzRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/7ba0ec/32.png) [@GrizzRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrizzRich)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/7 "2015-03-11T13:34:32Z")
Comedian Mike Birbiglia tells a story of taking a class in college that started way too early in the day. As I recall, he attended the first day and blew off the class for nearly the entire rest of the semester and then, with only a few classes left, he decided to go to class to find out about the final exam; only to find that it’d already been given. He ran to the professor’s office to explain that he’d mis-read the syllabus and to advise that he’d missed the exam; to which the professor replied “then you get the lowest grade”. Turns out, the person in the class who took the test and DID receive the lowest grade, passed; so Mike received _that same grade_. So, after not having attended the classes, or taking the final exam, he passed as well. ---
**Author:** ![xizor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xizor/32/102_2.png) [@xizor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xizor)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/8 "2015-03-11T18:46:58Z")
Counting cards in blackjack breaks no law and follows all the rules of the game, but gives the player an advantage over the house and drives casinos to do similar (not illegal but outside the spirit of the rules) things, like frequent reshuffles or invoking the “we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” out. ---
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/9 "2015-03-11T21:18:29Z")
I met a girl in New Zealand who’d married a random schoolfriend at 18 to avoid paying university fees; apparently the fees are means tested according to parental income for students under a certain age (25 maybe?) unless they were married, in which case it was assessed from their own income. Her parents were wealthy, but disapproved of her subject choice and refused to pay, and a guy in her class was in a similar situation. Getting married meant they both paid either nothing or a token payment, as they had 0 income, rather than thousands of dollars in fees. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/10 "2015-03-11T21:27:48Z")
> [@xizor](#): > > Counting cards in blackjack breaks no law and follows all the rules of the game, but gives the player an advantage over the house and drives casinos to do similar (not illegal but outside the spirit of the rules) things, like frequent reshuffles or invoking the “we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” out. The situation there AIUI is that in the early days casinos used to eject card counters, but they eventually realized that most gamblers are so bad at it that it didn’t really affect the house’s margins in any meaningful way and people were playing an awful lot of blackjack to practice at it. These days they even encourage it by selling how-to books in the gift shops and such. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/11 "2015-03-11T22:03:54Z")
In California, a wedding officiant must either get a “Deputy for a Day” permit from a local court, which requires a variety of paperwork, a $40-120 fee, and a training class and only permits you to perform marriages on a particular specified day _or_ be a minister. The requirements to be a minister are not really specified, and can be met in a few minutes by filling out a form on a webpage to have a “church” ordain you. I understand you can do similar things in most states. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/12 "2015-03-11T22:39:11Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > The situation there AIUI is that in the early days casinos used to eject card counters, but they eventually realized that most gamblers are so bad at it that it didn’t really affect the house’s margins in any meaningful way and people were playing an awful lot of blackjack to practice at it. These days they even encourage it by selling how-to books in the gift shops and such. Right. Casinos love gamblers with a fool-proof system, even if it’s just counting. Because no system, and almost no gambler, is good enough to dent the house edge, and their confidence in their system or skill makes them spend more than a casual recreational gambler. Free money, all above board. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/13 "2015-03-11T23:27:29Z")
> [@gnoitall](#): > > Right. > > Casinos love gamblers with a fool-proof system, even if it’s just counting. Because no system, and almost no gambler, is good enough to dent the house edge, and their confidence in their system or skill makes them spend more than a casual recreational gambler. Free money, all above board. Now if a gambler shows up with a calculator, pen and notepad, and is constantly scrawling on the paper and protesting to the dealer, _“No, no! Slow down! I can’t keep up!”_… :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2015, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/14 "2015-03-11T23:30:00Z")
> [@needscoffee](#): > > So there’s no way to add Vitamin B-1 to booze in the U.S. Or anything else that would minimize the damage. ---
**Author:** ![lisiate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f05b48/32.png) [@lisiate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lisiate)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2015, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/15 "2015-03-12T00:45:53Z")
> [@Filbert](#): > > I met a girl in New Zealand who’d married a random schoolfriend at 18 to avoid paying university fees; apparently the fees are means tested according to parental income for students under a certain age (25 maybe?) unless they were married, in which case it was assessed from their own income. Her parents were wealthy, but disapproved of her subject choice and refused to pay, and a guy in her class was in a similar situation. Getting married meant they both paid either nothing or a token payment, as they had 0 income, rather than thousands of dollars in fees. Almost certainly not to avoid course fees but to qualify for a student allowance for living costs. Allowances are means-tested based on parent’s income until age 24, but married 18-24 year olds were exempt from the parental means-test. If you didn’t qualify for an allowance you could borrow your living costs while studying (and probably still can). Of course if you’re 18 and don’t go to tertiary education, you can apply for a benefit anyway. Go figure. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2015, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/16 "2015-03-12T01:02:21Z")
> [@needscoffee](#): > > Can only think of a loophole with negative consequences. [Korsakoff’s Syndrome](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korsakoff%27s_syndrome), an amnesiac syndrome where people can’t remember beyond a short time period, a la “50 First Dates” - they forget anything they’ve learned within the last few minutes, is caused by B-1 vitamin deficiency, most often via severe alcohol abuse, which robs you of B-1. Fortifying booze with Vitamin B-1 would eliminate the main cause of this syndrome. According to US regulations, vitamins cannot be added to food without labeling the food as such. But other US regulations forbid labeling alcohol with anything that implies that it might be good for you. So there’s no way to add Vitamin B-1 to booze in the U.S. Technically, that sounds like a Catch-22, the converse of a loophole, if you will. Sounds like that would make for [a swell companion thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18199815) tho… ---
**Author:** ![JohnGalt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johngalt/32/184_2.png) [@JohnGalt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnGalt)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2015, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/17 "2015-03-12T02:43:10Z")
I don’t know if this is opposite from what you wanted, but in the 1970s South Dakota (finally) legalized right-turn on red. The way the law was written, a left-turn on red was also allowed when two one-way streets meet. However the only place this traffic setup showed up was Sioux Falls, which immediately put up a sign banning left-turns on red at that intersection. ---
**Author:** ![get\_lives](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ecb155/32.png) [@get\_lives](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/get_lives)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2015, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/18 "2015-03-12T03:28:56Z")
> [@JohnGalt](#): > > I don’t know if this is opposite from what you wanted, but in the 1970s South Dakota (finally) legalized right-turn on red. The way the law was written, a left-turn on red was also allowed when two one-way streets meet. However the only place this traffic setup showed up was Sioux Falls, which immediately put up a sign banning left-turns on red at that intersection. THAT intersection? There was only one? HAhAHahahahaha ---
**Author:** ![JohnGalt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johngalt/32/184_2.png) [@JohnGalt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnGalt)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/19 "2015-03-13T04:05:27Z")
> [@get\_lives](#): > > THAT intersection? There was only one? HAhAHahahahaha That was a long time ago. They probably got two or three now! In my home town, population 100,000 has only one place where two one way streets meet with a stop light and where a left-turn on red is allowed. Not enough people take advantage of it (it’s right across from the Mayo Clinic). ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/20 "2015-03-13T12:31:31Z")
To quote _Fortune_ Magazine: > [@](#): > > … a state law… lowers oil companies’ extraction taxes on new wells from 6.5% to 2% if the NYMEX average monthly price per barrel falls to $57.50. As of Feb. 1, that trigger was activated, so oil companies won’t have to pay the full 6.5% until the price rises above $72.50. If it remains below $55.09 for five consecutive months (we’re now in month two), the companies will pay no extraction taxes on any wells drilled after 1987, which is to say, the vast majority. Already… estimates of oil and gas revenues (have been slashed) from $8.3 billion to $4.3 billion. Talk about legislative capture! [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736.md?page=2)