Saturday, March 25, 2017

I Want to Find the Loophole in This Rule

Being a lawyer and all, I'm acutely interested in the language and enforceability of rules. Not to second guess someone else's draftsmanship, but I question the number of loopholes and the enforceability of this directive outside the pool in my in-laws' housing development in "Placentia," CA.

As a few commenters have already noted, who HASN'T had "active diarrhea" in the past 14 days? And what is "active" as opposed to "passive" diarrhea? Much less "currently?" How do we define "currently?" And who will enforce this and how?

Ostensibly, the purpose of this prohibition is to limit the spread of waterborne gastrointestinal bacteria and viruses. I'm no infectious disease expert, but I'm pretty sure that it isn't just the "pool water" you need to concern yourself with here.

Like if you fit this description, shouldn't you maybe be at home? Like maybe you shouldn't be entering the pool AREA and touching every surface in sight?

Leave aside the fact that this needs to be said for some reason. Every rule has its origins in a real event of some kind. Obviously, someone in this complex pulled a Caddy Shack/Beverly Hills Cop and made "a mistake in the pool." 

I can remember this happening to a kid at day camp when I was around Isaac's age, and it was like an international incident. When you're a well-cared for six year-old, that's basically the only thing you need to be afraid of, and the sight of a little turd outlined in the butt of this girl's bathing suit is seared into my memory forever.

What is it with pools that promotes shitting so much and directives against it? It's not like chlorine is the same as coffee and a cigarette. 

I don't get it. I'm writing a letter.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.