# 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:** 2
**Author:** ![Sahirrnee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sahirrnee/32/13937_2.png) [@Sahirrnee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sahirrnee)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/21 "2015-03-13T14:19:54Z")
Way back in the dark ages before today’s anti-stalking laws I was being harassed by an ex-bf. He was caking me dozens of times a day, threatening to kill me. I had saved answering machine tapes full of his plans for torture for me. Even messages from his mother telling me I’d better run because he was on his way over to kill me. I called the police, nothing they could do, it was my word against hie. Even the taped messages were no good because they couldn’t e used as evidence under MD wiretapping laws. I had tried to file charges against him with the DA, once again it was my word against his. I figured he would have to kill me before they would do anything. Finally I got him through the phone company trace. He called me 17 times in 15 minutes and they filed charges for telephone harassment. This just stepped up the harassment, now he was even more angry. Once again the police and DA would do nothing, it was still my word against his until I said those magic words… He said he will kill me _before we go to court_ Now instead of being harassment it became obstruction of justice. A warrant was issued for his arrest, he was picked up and put in jail. It no longer mattered it was my word against his and I had no proof, those 5 little words made all the difference in the world. I wish I had known sooner. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/22 "2015-03-13T14:35:12Z")
> [@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. Although one thing a lot of people don’t realize is that the left-on-red laws usually also make it legal to turn left onto a light-controlled highway on-ramp. I’d be surprised if there weren’t at least a couple of those in the state even back then. > [@JohnT](#): > > To quote _Fortune_ Magazine] > > Talk about legislative capture! Well, as far as government revenues go the actual royalties are a drop in the bucket compared to just the rapidly increasing income and property tax base due to the oil boom. Cutting the royalties to try to keep the oil companies actually operating as much as possible in the state when prices are low might (arguably) be a reasonable move from the state government’s point of view. ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/23 "2015-03-13T16:04:45Z")
Sadly less important now, but when I was a young man, Bona Fide Travelers could be served alcholic drinks after hours. Bars which were outside the urban boundries obviously served bona fide travelers. But in the 70’s improved roads and cars made them easily accessable to a certain class of people – pretty much anyone who didn’t have to get up for work early the next morning. ---
**Author:** ![Topologist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/topologist/32/3208_2.png) [@Topologist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Topologist)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/24 "2015-03-13T17:14:38Z")
More directly affecting my son than me: This year we’ve had a number of snow days, so the schools have to figure out how to meet the State requirement of a minimum of 180 days of instructional time. We just received the answer yesterday: The school system has added a Superintendent’s Conference Day on the Monday following the last day of school. This requires only that teachers report – the preceding Friday remains the last day of school for students. Apparently, this satisfies the State requirements even though it doesn’t add directly to instructional time for the students. Clever on the school system’s part, but it really feels like cheating… ---
**Author:** ![EmilyG](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/emilyg/32/364_2.png) [@EmilyG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EmilyG)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/25 "2015-03-13T18:01:30Z")
You’re not allowed to smoke in bus shelters in my city, so sometimes a smoker will have most of their body in the bus shelter while having their cigarette-holding arm outside of it. You’re also not allowed to have a visible open container of alcohol, so people skirt around the law by hiding it in a bag and drinking out of their bagged drink, though I’m sure this is done pretty much everywhere. ---
**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, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/26 "2015-03-13T18:06:47Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > Well, as far as government revenues go the actual royalties are a drop in the bucket compared to just the rapidly increasing income and property tax base due to the oil boom. Cutting the royalties to try to keep the oil companies actually operating as much as possible in the state when prices are low might (arguably) be a reasonable move from the state government’s point of view. [Actually…](http://www.nd.gov/omb/docs/revenueforecast/executive-revenue-forecast-nov-2014.pdf) Estimated N Dakota (State) revenues from all sources 2015-2017: Oil & Gas: $8.3 billion All other sources: $6.7 billion And, as the Fortune article mentions, the O&G will be reduced by half. ---
**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 13, 2015, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/27 "2015-03-13T18:44:10Z")
> [@EmilyG](#): > > You’re also not allowed to have a visible open container of alcohol, so people skirt around the law by hiding it in a bag and drinking out of their bagged drink, though I’m sure this is done pretty much everywhere. My work around uses a 16 oz plastic bottle of Lipton diet green tea (citrus flavor). Drink 1/4 to 1/3 and add vodka to fill. Police don’t seem to care about Lipton diet green tea (citrus flavor) drinkers, especially white ones. ---
**Author:** ![EmilyG](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/emilyg/32/364_2.png) [@EmilyG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EmilyG)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/28 "2015-03-13T18:46:29Z")
You can also hide vodka in an ordinary water bottle… or so I’ve heard. 😉 Though this was more for parties and such. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2015, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/29 "2015-03-13T20:10:42Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > [Actually…](http://www.nd.gov/omb/docs/revenueforecast/executive-revenue-forecast-nov-2014.pdf) > > Estimated N Dakota (State) revenues from all sources 2015-2017: > > Oil & Gas: $8.3 billion > All other sources: $6.7 billion > > And, as the Fortune article mentions, the O&G will be reduced by half. That’s a little misleading because the first page is just the revenue sources going into the general fund (which you’ll notice includes $300 million from O&G) whereas the second page is all the revenue collected from oil and gas, which mostly goes into various special funds. So it’s not quite apples-to-apples because there other revenue sources that also go into special funds. If you look at the census department data [here](http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk), it shows that about 45% of the revenue coming from “other sources” which I’ll assume is mostly the oil and gas revenue. Granted that is, er, quite a lot more than the “drop in the bucket” I said earlier\* but it’s not utterly dependent on royalties like, say, Alaska is. \*My confusion there is that even though they’re collecting a lot of O&G revenues, they’re not actually spending that much of it. Most of it statutorily goes into those special funds and only that little $300 million allotment goes into the general fund that pays for most government services. At least as far as the state budget itself is concerned, the bonanza from the oil boom has mostly been in increased sales, income, and property tax collections. ---
**Author:** ![hogarth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hogarth/32/1773_2.png) [@hogarth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hogarth)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/30 "2015-03-14T01:11:46Z")
I read an article not long ago about an investment contract sold by Aviva France (in the late '80s) that allows the investor to pick what funds to invest in retrospectively. Nowadays, with the benefit of the internet for price discovery, some people are using these contracts to rack up annual returns of 60% or more: [http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/02/27/2120422/meet-the-man-who-could-own-aviva-france/](http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/02/27/2120422/meet-the-man-who-could-own-aviva-france/) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/31 "2015-03-14T02:32:11Z")
> [@Topologist](#): > > More directly affecting my son than me: This year we’ve had a number of snow days, so the schools have to figure out how to meet the State requirement of a minimum of 180 days of instructional time. We just received the answer yesterday: The school system has added a Superintendent’s Conference Day on the Monday following the last day of school. This requires only that teachers report – the preceding Friday remains the last day of school for students. > > Apparently, this satisfies the State requirements even though it doesn’t add directly to instructional time for the students. Clever on the school system’s part, but it really feels like cheating… I totally get the cheating part, but the only other three fixes appear to be: 1. Building some flexibility into the state instructional time requirement–that is, in crazy weather years, offering waivers to schools. 2. Scrapping the stupid traditional school calendar, with summers off, in favor of a calendar with breaks scattered throughout the year. Such a calendar offers more flexibility for dealing with snow, since there are so many other little breaks that can be used for makeup days. 3. Extending the school year a very long way into the summer. The first two solutions are long-term solutions and likely statewide decisions. The third one is going to be deeply unpopular. A little bit of clever bookkeeping might be the least bad of a set of lousy solutions. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/32 "2015-03-14T05:37:59Z")
> [@Topologist](#): > > More directly affecting my son than me: This year we’ve had a number of snow days, so the schools have to figure out how to meet the State requirement of a minimum of 180 days of instructional time. We just received the answer yesterday: The school system has added a Superintendent’s Conference Day on the Monday following the last day of school. This requires only that teachers report – the preceding Friday remains the last day of school for students. > > Apparently, this satisfies the State requirements even though it doesn’t add directly to instructional time for the students. Clever on the school system’s part, but it really feels like cheating… When I was in school many years ago, it was common on bad winter weather days to hear the announcement that “buses will be leaving at 1:15pm to take students home”. It was obvious why – winter weather in western Minnesota can be bad. But why 1:15pm? Eventually a relative who worked for the school system explained that it could be counted as a full day (and collect the state funds for the school system) if classes were in session until at least 1pm. So there were several winter days that ended 2-1/4 hours early, but counted as full days. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/33 "2015-03-14T05:45:22Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I totally get the cheating part, but the only other three fixes appear to be: > > 1. Building some flexibility into the state instructional time requirement–that is, in crazy weather years, offering waivers to schools. > 2. Scrapping the stupid traditional school calendar, with summers off, in favor of a calendar with breaks scattered throughout the year. Such a calendar offers more flexibility for dealing with snow, since there are so many other little breaks that can be used for makeup days. > 3. Extending the school year a very long way into the summer. > > The first two solutions are long-term solutions and likely statewide decisions. The third one is going to be deeply unpopular. A little bit of clever bookkeeping might be the least bad of a set of lousy solutions. Both options 2 & 3 could involve a lot of Capitol Expenditures for school systems: most of our school buildings are not air conditioned. And often don’t have openable windows, or other sources of ventilation. And installing air conditioning could be quite expensive, because often the heating system is hot water/steam radiators – no way to easily add air conditioning. And realistically, you can’t expect students to learn in a stifling hot, unventilated classroom. Or even expect teachers to teach in them. We had a late heat wave, after schools had started recently, and they had to shut down the schools and send kids home. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/34 "2015-03-14T15:15:06Z")
The anti-abortion crowd points out that, since Roe v. Wade doesn’t specifically say that only a licensed medical doctor can do the procedure, apparently anyone can perform an abortion!!! ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/35 "2015-03-14T15:34:36Z")
How about a loophole that’s a noose? I know I mentioned this in another thread once, but now I gotta cite. Medicare covers hospice for those who are “certified by their attending physician (if any) and by the hospice physician as being terminally ill with a prognosis of 6 months or less to live, should the illness run its normal course.” Sounds good, right? Except that it means you cannot get home hospice if you’re dying of nothing. Or dying of old age. They used to allow coding for "Debility, Not Otherwise Specified”, and “Adult Failure to Thrive”, which is medical speak for “dying of nothing we can name.” They put the kibosh on that effective Oct. 2014: > [@](#): > > Hospices will have until October 1, 2014, to ensure they conform their coding practices to comply with a “clarification” issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in its final FY2014 Hospice Wage Index and Payment Rate Update, published in the Fed. Reg. on August 7, 2013.1 CMS’s policy, as clarified, is that the ICD-9 codes for “adult failure to thrive” and “debility” are not to be used as principal diagnoses on the hospice Medicare claim form when a related definitive diagnosis has been established or confirmed by the provider. Any claims submitted after October 1, 2014 that have debility or adult failure to thrive as the principal diagnosis will be returned to the provider to resubmit with a more definitive principal diagnosis coding. [Redirecting | Baker Donelson](http://www.ober.com/publications/2439-adult-failure-thrive-debility-can-no-longer-be-principal-diagnoses-hospice) Wading gently through HIPAA here, I have a patient who is dying. Why? Because he’s nearly 100 years old and his body is worn out. He has a little high blood pressure, a history of cancer that his doctor says is not why he’s dying, and…not much else. They’ve been over him with a fine toothed comb and can’t find a terminal illness for a piece of documentation. And so his family is completely overwhelmed (logistically and financially) and I can’t transfer him to home hospice which would provide them with the resources they need. I have to work within home health benefits instead, which are woefully inadequate to the situation. So, if you die, better hope you die of something with a label, or you’re dying broke and alone. ---
**Author:** ![Topologist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/topologist/32/3208_2.png) [@Topologist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Topologist)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/36 "2015-03-14T15:55:03Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I totally get the cheating part, but the only other three fixes appear to be: > > 1. Building some flexibility into the state instructional time requirement–that is, in crazy weather years, offering waivers to schools. > 2. Scrapping the stupid traditional school calendar, with summers off, in favor of a calendar with breaks scattered throughout the year. Such a calendar offers more flexibility for dealing with snow, since there are so many other little breaks that can be used for makeup days. > 3. Extending the school year a very long way into the summer. > > The first two solutions are long-term solutions and likely statewide decisions. The third one is going to be deeply unpopular. A little bit of clever bookkeeping might be the least bad of a set of lousy solutions. Absolutely agree that they found a good solution. I’m not complaining, more impressed by their cleverness (not something I expect to find in a school bureaucracy). I think NY State has used or at least considered (1) in truly crazy weather years. Mostly, though, schools end up having to take back scheduled vacation days in really bad years, not a popular choice. ---
**Author:** ![HeyHomie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heyhomie/32/207_2.png) [@HeyHomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HeyHomie)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/37 "2015-03-14T16:27:42Z")
Regarding snow days and the school calendar: here in my little corner of southeast Missouri, the snow & ice was so bad for a period of time that the kids who attend Viburnum schools went to school just two days in three weeks. That means that Viburnum C-4 Schools are down 13 days, and looking at having school well into June. Parents are _ **pissed** _. Some have complained of having to re-schedule vacations, others have said that their kids won’t be in school after the original planned end-of-school date, extra days be damned, and if the school doesn’t like it they can send a truant officer. Fortunately, I believe (perhaps incorrectly) that Missouri gives schools, particularly rural ones, more leeway when it comes to this sort of thing. I guess we’ll see how it pans out in the coming weeks. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/38 "2015-03-14T18:15:39Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > So, if you die, better hope you die of something with a label, or you’re dying broke and alone. Encourage this patient’s family to seek help from a lawyer or legal aid organization. Someone appears to be misinterpreting something. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/39 "2015-03-14T19:46:28Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Encourage this patient’s family to seek help from a lawyer or legal aid organization. Someone appears to be misinterpreting something. Definitely, I did that first thing. And I’ve been speaking with hospice nurses and directors, because I just can’t believe this is real. So far, no luck. ☹ Not giving up. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2015, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736/40 "2015-03-14T19:57:29Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Definitely, I did that first thing. And I’ve been speaking with hospice nurses and directors, because I just can’t believe this is real. So far, no luck. ☹ Not giving up. Something is not adding up. From CMS: > [@](#): > > Therefore, the Medicare Hospice Benefit eligibility requirements will not change as a result of the clarifications in the proposed rule. We believe that the certifying physicians have the best clinical experience, competence and judgment to make the determination that an individual is terminally ill. We continue to require the reporting of all related comorbidities, regardless of the quantity, in the hospice clinical record and on the hospice claims. The eligibility is based on the prognosis. The documentation must include the various diagnoses. From [a blog about the issue](http://www.geripal.org/2014/09/principle-hospice-diagnosis-versus-hospice-eligibility.html): > [@](#): > > Getting back to our question “Can Someone with Debility or Adult Failure to Thrive be Admitted to Hospice?” Lets look at a case adapted from CMS guidance: > > > [@](#): > > > > - An 85 year old patient with dysphagia, decreased oral intake, malnutrition, weight loss, BMI of 18.6 upon admission, decreasing functional status, progressed from a walker to chair to bed in less than six months, has no underlying diagnoses other than frailty and adult failure to thrive. This patient was determined to be terminally ill with a prognosis of less than 6 months by the certifying physicians. \* > > Can this patient be enrolled in hospice? Yes. The condition the hospice physician feels is most contributory to the terminal prognosis would be reported first on the hospice claim form as the principal hospice diagnosis, along with all other related conditions. The principal and additional diagnosis could include: malnutrition, dysphagia, muscle weakness. CMS has also clarified that debility and AFTT could be listed as additional diagnoses on the claims form (just not the principal diagnosis). > > How is the patient hospice eligible? He would be eligible for hospice because two doctors certified that he is terminally ill with an expected prognosis of less than 6 months. These certifying physicians could use the “adult failure to thrive syndrome” or “non-disease specific decline in clinical status” hospice LCDs as guidelines to document hospice eligibility. AFTT could be listed as an additional (not primary) hospice diagnosis as described above. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outrageous-or-at-least-interesting-policy-law-rule-loopholes-that-you-have-encountered/714736.md?page=3)