A simple and perfect solution to the "10 items or less" offenders

I picked out a container of pink sprinkles for my daughter's birthday cupcakes in the confectionary aisle of the supermarket.

I took my place in the "10 items or less" line. Standing in front of me was a couple - husband and wife perhaps - with at least 25 items.

Not 11. Not 12. More than twice the posted limit. 

I couldn't believe it. 

Adding to this unfathomable item count was the inefficiency of these two people. The man was bagging the groceries while the woman - who was supposed to be scanning the items - was badgering him about which items should be bagged together.

They bickered throughout the entire process. 

Meanwhile, I stood there with my $2 container of sprinkles, waiting for these two morons who couldn't count to ten to finish and move on.

I almost said something. I wanted to. I needed to.

I refrained. Rare for me, but it happens. I think it was the bickering. For whatever reason, their discord prevented my own wrath from entering the fray. 

But I had a thought. A solution to this problem. A universal fix to this age-old dilemma. 

A new rule:

If a person violates the "10 items or less" sign, he or she (or they) are required to purchase the items for the person in line directly behind them, provided that he or she has the appropriate number of items.

Brilliant. Right?

Not only does this solution offer restitution to victims like me, but it also encourages offenders to move quickly lest someone get in line behind them and earn themselves some free groceries.

In this case, I would hand the nagging woman my pink sprinkles, point to the "10 items or less" sign, and say, "Here you go, lady. Two dozen ain't even close to ten. Tell your man to bag this one separately."  

A solution, both perfect in its vindication as well as its punishment. 

 Can I get an amen?