Two recent incidents caused me to exclaim “There ought to be a law against that . . .!”

Police Cars Should Not Be Permitted to Drive With Their Doors Open

Last Thursday, I saw two police cars driving down the road with their rear doors open and passengers in the back seat. I wrote down the squad car numbers and contacted the police department to find out WHY they were driving around with their doors open. Silly me, I thought that was against the law. According to the police, it is POLICE POLICY to leave the back doors open when transporting four police officers in a squad–(in case they need to “exit quickly due to an incident”). Apparently, the rear doors lock automatically and the only way to make sure the police can get out is to leave the doors open.

HELLO, can anyone say “power door locks”?

And a few more rhetorical questions:

• How often has it been necessary for the officers in the back seat to “exit quickly due to an incident”?
• Aren’t there safety features in the cars that allow for opening the back doors in an emergency when transporting non-officers? If not, shouldn’t there be?
• How much of this policy is due to the officers in the front forgetting to let the officers in the back out once they get where they are going 🙂

A Business Selling “US Postal Services” Should Charge The Same Price As The Post Office

The other day I needed to mail an envelope via Priority Mail.  I was in a mini-mall (purchasing the item to go in the envelope) when I noticed the familiar red-white-&-blue eagle symbolizing the USPS in one of those places that will ship UPS or DHL, etc.  I went in and asked if their rates & services were the same as the post office.  They said “Yes, but no waiting in a long line!”  So, I packed up my items and started the process.  Indeed there was no line.  My suspicion should have started there . . .  I DID get suspicious when the salesperson started typing all my address information into his computer (they never do THAT at the post office).  And, of course the one-finger typing method used by the sales person meant that I had already spent more time waiting than I would have at the post office . . . Then he says, “That will be $6.95.” for something I knew should have been around $4.  I said “forget it” and went to the post office (where I paid $4.60).

Apparently, according to the folks at the post office, unless you are in a government-run United States Postal Service building, they can charge you ANYTHING THEY WANT for postal services—$10 for a stamp, $30 for an envelope, whatever.

Shouldn’t there be a law that says they need to clearly post (1) What the USPS fee for that service is and (2) what additional “convenience fee” they will impose?  Then I can decide in advance whether the “convenience” is worth the fee.  But NOOOOO!

Well enough ranting for today.

What laws would you add (or remove) from the books?