AAAAHHH YES Kansas does it again

[Tama]

Chick fil a just closes on their own on Sunday. At least they don't force it on others.

[Jetfire]

I firmly believe that a business should be able to set their own hours. If they decide they only want to be open Dec 24 2100 to Dec 25 0900, then so be it. Blue Laws get in the way of that sort of freedom.

Especially since the Blue Laws are often very arbitrary. Why is it that restuarants and gas stations could be open 24/7, but finding a place to buy food to make yourself must be limited to 12-5 on Sundays (as is the case in most of New Brunswick?). Oh! But if the grocery store is small enough, they can open as long as they want on Sunday; but if you're a super market, you only get 5 hours.

My province still has blue laws on the books, but at least municipalities can override them for the most part, which our 3 biggest cities have finally. It'll probably be a few more decades, if ever, before the rest of the province breaks out of the 12-5 Only Sunday hours.

That said, I'm also fine with laws saying that employees can only be allowed to work at most X hours a week and must have at least a 1 day stretch (worded lawyerly) within a week time period, with minimal exceptions.

[s_stabeler]

No selling discounted alcohol (a.k.a. happy hour) is ridiculous.
.

yes and no. If a nation has a binge drinking problem, then banning people from discounting alcohol is one possibility for trying to reduce the problem. ( note that this shouldn't be the *only* thing tried, but it probably wouldn't hurt.)

I'll agree the other restrictions are ridiculous.

[Greenday]

yes and no. If a nation has a binge drinking problem, then banning people from discounting alcohol is one possibility for trying to reduce the problem. ( note that this shouldn't be the *only* thing tried, but it probably wouldn't hurt.)

I'll agree the other restrictions are ridiculous.

I can't remember the last time I saw an adult chug beers down just to pay discounted prices.

[s_stabeler]

I'm more thinking that you'd a) have to stop drinking sooner because you can't afford it and b) are less likely to decide to go out for a session of binge drinking if you know it'll cost an arm and a leg.

Hence why it's only used in a situation when binge drinking is already a problem- the idea is to discourage drinking, thus hopefully reducing the problem. And again, it would NOT be the only method.

One limitation I would make on commerce, incidentally, is banning loss-leaders in certain circumstances.( specifically: if you are pricing a product below the cost of production to drive other businesses out of business, it should be illegal ( because it's almost always a large company trying to get an effective monopoly on said good in a certain area)

[HYHYBT]

Set aside the "in a week," and just have "no more than six work days before a minimum 36 contiguous hours off."

[s_stabeler]

fair enough- it gets the idea across.

[Panacea]

Blue laws were originally a reaction to the repeal of Prohibition.

Temperance movement folks were easily able to get the states to pass blue laws and ABC laws to exercise some kind of control over boozing, which was a genuine problem both before, during, and after the repeal. It was as much about a social problem as religion, and got extended to a lot of other things as a reaction to gains by the labor movement.