Doormat ban...at what point are people going to say 'no more?'

There will come a point where you are going to be fined for walking on the cracks in the pavement or wearing a loud shirt in a built up area.
The story below is an example of what happens if you do not stand up to the absurdity of petty officialdom.
If I was a tenant in one of these properties I would make a point of joining with all the others in buying new doormats for the property and then reporting my neighbour. Give them a hundred complaints and a hundred cases to take action against. Big story for the local press which will then go national and the council (who actually work for the people they are targeting and seem to have forgotten that a long time ago) will be forced to back down or face ridicule.
Then, should any other petty official consider doing something similar he may have second thoughts.

Council bosses ban 'safety hazard' doormats
13th September 2006

The doormat: A danger to your health?
It has no sharp edges and contains no electrical wires. But health and safety officials have launched a crackdown on what they say is the latest dangerous item of homeware - the doormat. More commonly associated with the humble role of being somewhere for visitors to wipe their feet, council chiefs have raised the mat's status to that of 'tripping hazard'.
Now they have banned the floor furnishing and ordered tenants to remove the offending items or risk having them taken away.
But residents who have received the ultimatum dismissed the idea as "ludicrous".
Bristol City Council sent a letter entitled "Health and Safety Issues - Hazardous Mats" to thousands of tenants living in flats and high-rise blocks.
It reads: "During a routine Health and Safety inspection of the block, it was noted that loose mats were present in hallways/corridors outside of people's flats.
"These represent a 'tripping hazard' and should be removed immediately. By all means have your own mats inside your front door but please do not leave them outside, creating a risk to others.
"Therefore, I am requesting that if you have a mat outside, it is removed by September 18th. Any mat remaining in the hallways/corridors after this date will be removed and subsequently disposed of."
The order has been dismissed by residents as the latest example of over-zealousness among health and safety executives.
Retired gardener Roger Perry, 62, said he had no intention of giving up his door mat. He said: "This is absolutely ludicrous. The council says mats are a hazard - god only knows how. I've lived here 13 years and never heard of any accidents.
"It's like Big Brother watching us. I'm keeping mine here to see what they do. It only cost a couple of quid, but if they take it, that's theft."
His neighbour, Albert Peacock, 82, said: "I'm not moving my mat for anybody - it's a non-slip mat.
"I bought it for my home like everyone else and it's staying. It's our responsibility to keep the corridor outside tidy and our front doors clean.
"If the council are worried about people tripping, they should concentrate on mending the pavements."
Tory councillor Mark Weston said the policy was "ridiculous" and "a total waste of time and resources".
But Bristol City Council insisted doormats could pose a hazard if there was a need to evacuate a council-owned building.
A spokeswoman said: "We know that asking people to remove mats is not popular, but it is important that corridors in council properties are kept clear, as they are a means of escape from fire.
"Mats are a trip hazard, particularly as many properties are occupied by older people or people with disabilities.
"This is not a new policy, it has been around for the last 20 years at least - but on a recent inspection we noticed some mats had crept back so we've reminded tenants to remove them."