Why do we have to wait until November? Can’t this poll serve as the official vote? I say if, by the end of the day, YES has the majority then it passes. Done. Beer this Sunday.
Perhaps DM can add another poll. This one would be reasons that Sunday sales should not be allowed. Or maybe those that voted “No” could expand on their vote in the comments section of this poll. I would be curious how that would play out in this demographic.
I didn’t think “yes” explainations would be all that interesting. But, if asked I would say: “I like beer, and other alcoholic beverages. I have no reasons (moral, religious, or otherwise) to limit sales to any particular days of the week.”
Also, I wasn’t looking for residents to expand on their vote to start a debate. Only to better understand the other point of view.
I like the cocktails reply, but another reason for asking for only the ‘no’ explanations is that the ‘yes’ case is pretty obvious. Still, in the interests of earnestly stating the obvious at painful length, here it is:
Banning Sunday alcohol sales isn’t the end of the world, but it does inconvenience a lot of people who are out shopping on Sundays and would like to pick up some beer, wine or liquor, and cannot do so. What possible justification is there, if I’m out at Trader Joe’s on a Sunday at 2 p.m., for not being allowed to pick up some Two Buck Chuck, while I would be allowed to buy wine there any other day of the week at 2 p.m.?
The only reason offhand I can think of (hmm…) is that Sunday is the Lord’s Day, and that picking up booze on the Sabbath disrespects Him and/or His Day somehow. Let’s leave aside the murky theological question of whether Yahweh would find Sunday purchases of Two Buck Chuck offensive, it’s clear that this is a theological reason, and the U.S. isn’t supposed to be a country that respects one religion over another (or none), the Baptists over the Seventh Day Adventists or Jews, etc. If some Christians find Sunday alcohol purchases problematic, they’re free not to buy on that day, and Christian business owners are free to not sell on Sundays if they wish (nobody compels Chik-Fil-A to open on Sundays). But to prohibit all people from Sunday alcohol purchases for that reason is positively unAmerican!
Well, now, look: isn’t every day the Lord’s day? I mean, if one really believes He’s the omnipresent & omnipotent Creator, shouldn’t He be given the same respect every day of the week? And if He’s not offended by us purchasing adult beverages on Wednesday (as I truly believe He is not– after all, wasn’t there a miracle involving water turned into wine?), then I don’t think He’s gonna get all Old-Testament-y on us for buying them on a Sunday. There are so many more ways to respect God than to refrain from buying alcohol on a Sunday– like, say, feeding the hungry, volunteering in nursing homes, donating blood, etc., etc. (TOK, I’m just ranting– I actually agree with your whole post…just making a point about “the Lord’s Day”…)
I think this is a somewhat simplistic way to look at it.
Many if not most laws restrict freedom in some way. Often, there’s a sufficiently good justification to overcome the imposed restrictions. For example, we do not have the freedom to kill whoever we like as society has determined that this infringes on others’ right to life.
Now that is an extreme example of a case in which someone voting “yes” to more freedom would have to explain their motives. And I think almost all people could agree that that is an extreme example.
You apparently feel that Sunday alcohol sales are an extreme example in the other direction – that it would be inconceivable or stupid for someone to want to “restrict freedom” and that they must therefore explain themselves. However, there might be other people who view it as a more reasonable question with arguments on both sides. Sure you have more “freedom” to buy alcohol when you want, but others have put forth the argument that it would increase cases of drunk driving, thereby further endangering their right to life (i.e., freedom from being killed or injured by a drunk driver). I’m not personally convinced by that argument, but there could certainly be other, valid arguments that present a “no” vote as being more concerned with “freedom.”
I agree that the “no” people have more explaining to do as it appears more difficult for most of the public to come up with rational explanations as to why we should continue to restrict Sunday sales, but I think it is unfair to characterize them as simply wanting to “restrict freedom.”
All that beind said, I will be voting wholeheartedly “yes”.
Killing may be legal if done in self-defense. And drinking may be illegal if done while one is driving a car or if one is under 21. I know that neither of those situations is currently at issue, but my point is that there are reasons and justifications behind each of these nuances.
Currently, buying alcohol on Sundays is illegal. Maybe that should change. But my overall point is that I think it is unfair to label those who wish the law to remain as people who desire to “restrict freedom”. Every law is about balancing freedoms and the “no” voters have simply put a different priority on the various freedoms at issue than most of the people who read this site.
What;s the nuance with driving. It is not the drinking that is illegal, it is the driving while drinking. Park your car and get loaded — perfectly legal.
The bottom line is the Sunday ban makes zero sense. It never banned drinking, it banned buying the booze from retailers. You were free to buy 10 bottles of Jack on Saturday and drink yourself to death on Sunday. So wat was the point of the Sunday ban — to keep you dry if and only if it slipped your mind to hit the package store Saturday night? What possible legitimate interest does that serve? None, especially since even if you forgot to hit the package store you were free to hit the Brick Store and drink yourself silly.
This was a completely arbitrary interference with liberty from the very beginning.
“This was a completely arbitrary interference with liberty from the very beginning.”
It was hardly arbitrary. Like most interference with liberty in the past, it was done in the name of imposing religious beliefs, specifically Christian ones.
Every law is about balancing freedoms and the “no” voters have simply put a different priority on the various freedoms at issue than most of the people who read this site.
__________________
“Different priority” is a eupamism for “don’t care at all about others’ rights.” It is easy to place a low priority on a freedom you don’t exercise. A teetotaller cares nothing for banning Sunday sales because he doesn’t buy any day. He’s free to have a fridge sans Sweetwater. But he has zero business keeping it from mine any day of the week. I personally place no value on the freedom to play the guitar. I don’t even know how to do it. So let’s ban Friday guitar playing! If I can convince 51% of the voters that we should ban this, then the hell with the 49% who know how to play. We just place a “different priority” on the freedom to play guitar, right?
Just to be clear, I too think that Sunday alcohol bans do not serve a compelling purpose.
My point all along is just that it seems unfair to characterize people who support the ban as simply wishing to “restrict freedom”. And no, I don’t think that “different priorities” means the same as “don’t care about others’ rights”. It instead means that they value certain other rights more than the right to buy alcohol on Sunday. You may not see how any other rights can truly conflict with the right to purchase/sell alcohol on Sunday, but that doesn’t mean that such a dichotomy doesn’t exist.
Again, I’m not saying that dichotomy necessarily does exist, but it’s unfair to label supporters of the ban as “restrictors of freedom” if they have made a legitimate (although perhaps to you and me, skewed) value assessment to reach their conclusion.
” but it’s unfair to label supporters of the ban as “restrictors of freedom” if they have made a legitimate (although perhaps to you and me, skewed) value assessment to reach their conclusion.”
It’s entirely fair and accurate. Thier personal values have created a prohibitiion that applies to everyone. How is that not a restriction of freedom?
` It makes for shorter lines and smaller crowds at Trader Joe’s on Sunday mornings
“Shall the governing authority of (name of county or municipality) be authorized to permit and regulate package sales by retailers of both malt beverages and wine on Sundays between the hours of 12:30 P.M. and 11:30 P.M.?”
I won’t soon forget learning about Georgia’s Sunday booze sales ban the hard way. It was shortly after moving here and I was at the grocery store buying the ingredients for a special Sunday dinner to celebrate being in our new home. The cashier pointed out that she couldn’t sell me the wine I had carefully selected. Had to serve that rib roast with a nice iced tea. Now, THAT was a sin.
Almost identical experience. It was at the then Harris Teeter, now Kroger, on Briarcliff near Emory. Clerk told me he couldn’t sell me the bottle of wine I’d picked out. I figured, well, local ordinance — I’ll just have to find a store in a different precinct. So I asked him where I would have to go to buy carryout alcohol. His reply: “Tennessee.” I damn near died.
After having worked in the alcohol trade in another no-sales-on-Sunday state, I definitely enjoyed having a dedicated day off. I KNEW I wouldn’t get called into work, so I could make plans with friends (or have a lazy day after a busy week.)
Understandable, though I wonder how many businesses in Decatur sell alcohol that aren’t already open on Sundays? Ale Yeah is the only one that comes to mind.
So basically the right of the individual to have his rights not infringed by someone else’s religion (which is really the root of this law despite excuses to the contrary) will hinge on whether some bar owner agrees? Yeah, I don’t think the impact on business should be a consideration when removing a restriction on individual liberty.
I agree. It’ll get interesting if that’s the tack the City tries to take.
DM, do you know, or can you discover, how this will play out vis a vis county and city? If Dekalb goes one way can Decatur just go along, or would we have to have a separate vote? Or could Decatur go the opposite way (if Dekalb voters turn out to be wrongheaded about it)?
Decatur and DeKalb are separate local entities and would each vote, just like Chamblee, Stone Mountain, Doraville, Pine Lake, and the rest of the cities in the county.
You can buy take-home booze Mon – Sat and the pubs somehow manage to survive those days. For that reason, I cannot find any credibility in a bar or pub claiming that Sunday take-home booze will harm them.
I can’t imagine why Decatur wouldn’t want to be out front on this issue. Passing liquor sales on Sunday within the city limits only impacts a handful of businesses. I can only think of the little Kroger and a few convenience stores that sell take home booze. If we were to pass the law before our surrounding areas, we would certainly see an uptick in sales at these few businesses and I certainly don’t see the UJoint being any less crowded on a beautiful Sunday afternoon just because the Hop & Shop sells beer. What am I missing here?
In college, I worked in a liquor store for a while. Saturday was the biggest beer sales day. Certain individuals would buy cases and cases and cases and cases of beer to sell illegally on Sunday… Now, we wouldn’t want to hurt their booming business model, would we?
A friend that works with the state legislature told me most of the opposition was from liquor store owners. They feel that Sunday sales would not out weigh the lower overhead of being open only six days a week. OK understandable, but there is obviously considerable demand for Sunday sales and the few individual businesses this will affect will still have the choice of opening on Sunday or not. Oh and there are some religious folks opposed also.
Liquor stores manage to profit, despite the competition with grocery and convenience stores, every other day of the week, so I see no reason why they can’t be profitable on Sunday.
The major reason for voting “yes” in the poll was that frankly, I think its a major inconvenience that I am supposed to remember to buy my wine the day BEFORE my book club meets. I think its annoying to have to change out of my pjs at 9pm on Saturday to run out to Publix or other store to purchase a bottle of wine. However, I suspect counties like Cobb will still continue to inconvenience our members out there but they can always swing into Fulton on the way to our meeting.
Latest from Decaturish
This poll is funny.
It is, indeed. DM, you’re cute when you’re droll.
Why do we have to wait until November? Can’t this poll serve as the official vote? I say if, by the end of the day, YES has the majority then it passes. Done. Beer this Sunday.
+1
Perhaps DM can add another poll. This one would be reasons that Sunday sales should not be allowed. Or maybe those that voted “No” could expand on their vote in the comments section of this poll. I would be curious how that would play out in this demographic.
Why should only “no” people explain?
Because the rest of us can’t put our cocktails down to type.
ZING! Good ‘un.
I didn’t think “yes” explainations would be all that interesting. But, if asked I would say: “I like beer, and other alcoholic beverages. I have no reasons (moral, religious, or otherwise) to limit sales to any particular days of the week.”
Also, I wasn’t looking for residents to expand on their vote to start a debate. Only to better understand the other point of view.
I like the cocktails reply, but another reason for asking for only the ‘no’ explanations is that the ‘yes’ case is pretty obvious. Still, in the interests of earnestly stating the obvious at painful length, here it is:
Banning Sunday alcohol sales isn’t the end of the world, but it does inconvenience a lot of people who are out shopping on Sundays and would like to pick up some beer, wine or liquor, and cannot do so. What possible justification is there, if I’m out at Trader Joe’s on a Sunday at 2 p.m., for not being allowed to pick up some Two Buck Chuck, while I would be allowed to buy wine there any other day of the week at 2 p.m.?
The only reason offhand I can think of (hmm…) is that Sunday is the Lord’s Day, and that picking up booze on the Sabbath disrespects Him and/or His Day somehow. Let’s leave aside the murky theological question of whether Yahweh would find Sunday purchases of Two Buck Chuck offensive, it’s clear that this is a theological reason, and the U.S. isn’t supposed to be a country that respects one religion over another (or none), the Baptists over the Seventh Day Adventists or Jews, etc. If some Christians find Sunday alcohol purchases problematic, they’re free not to buy on that day, and Christian business owners are free to not sell on Sundays if they wish (nobody compels Chik-Fil-A to open on Sundays). But to prohibit all people from Sunday alcohol purchases for that reason is positively unAmerican!
Concise and awesome post.
Well, now, look: isn’t every day the Lord’s day? I mean, if one really believes He’s the omnipresent & omnipotent Creator, shouldn’t He be given the same respect every day of the week? And if He’s not offended by us purchasing adult beverages on Wednesday (as I truly believe He is not– after all, wasn’t there a miracle involving water turned into wine?), then I don’t think He’s gonna get all Old-Testament-y on us for buying them on a Sunday. There are so many more ways to respect God than to refrain from buying alcohol on a Sunday– like, say, feeding the hungry, volunteering in nursing homes, donating blood, etc., etc. (TOK, I’m just ranting– I actually agree with your whole post…just making a point about “the Lord’s Day”…)
+2 (adding one for my husband)
Interesting how one little question can elicit so many responses.
I’m actually in the “hell, yes” camp, so I was just curious to see why one group was asked to explain but not the other.
Now if we can just get the growler license passed, we can all happily spend our free time as drunk as cubalibre in college.
Heyyyyy– I resemble that remark!
Simple.
“Yes” people should not have to explain wy they want more freedom.
“No” people should have to explain why they wish to continue restricting freedom.
I think this is a somewhat simplistic way to look at it.
Many if not most laws restrict freedom in some way. Often, there’s a sufficiently good justification to overcome the imposed restrictions. For example, we do not have the freedom to kill whoever we like as society has determined that this infringes on others’ right to life.
Now that is an extreme example of a case in which someone voting “yes” to more freedom would have to explain their motives. And I think almost all people could agree that that is an extreme example.
You apparently feel that Sunday alcohol sales are an extreme example in the other direction – that it would be inconceivable or stupid for someone to want to “restrict freedom” and that they must therefore explain themselves. However, there might be other people who view it as a more reasonable question with arguments on both sides. Sure you have more “freedom” to buy alcohol when you want, but others have put forth the argument that it would increase cases of drunk driving, thereby further endangering their right to life (i.e., freedom from being killed or injured by a drunk driver). I’m not personally convinced by that argument, but there could certainly be other, valid arguments that present a “no” vote as being more concerned with “freedom.”
I agree that the “no” people have more explaining to do as it appears more difficult for most of the public to come up with rational explanations as to why we should continue to restrict Sunday sales, but I think it is unfair to characterize them as simply wanting to “restrict freedom.”
All that beind said, I will be voting wholeheartedly “yes”.
My solution is simplistic because the problem is extremely simple.
The problem with your example is that killing is illegal. Drinking alcohol is not illegal.
Killing may be legal if done in self-defense. And drinking may be illegal if done while one is driving a car or if one is under 21. I know that neither of those situations is currently at issue, but my point is that there are reasons and justifications behind each of these nuances.
Currently, buying alcohol on Sundays is illegal. Maybe that should change. But my overall point is that I think it is unfair to label those who wish the law to remain as people who desire to “restrict freedom”. Every law is about balancing freedoms and the “no” voters have simply put a different priority on the various freedoms at issue than most of the people who read this site.
And some of us are genuinely curious about their reasons. Yet, of 15 who voted ‘no’, none has accepted the invitation to share.
What;s the nuance with driving. It is not the drinking that is illegal, it is the driving while drinking. Park your car and get loaded — perfectly legal.
The bottom line is the Sunday ban makes zero sense. It never banned drinking, it banned buying the booze from retailers. You were free to buy 10 bottles of Jack on Saturday and drink yourself to death on Sunday. So wat was the point of the Sunday ban — to keep you dry if and only if it slipped your mind to hit the package store Saturday night? What possible legitimate interest does that serve? None, especially since even if you forgot to hit the package store you were free to hit the Brick Store and drink yourself silly.
This was a completely arbitrary interference with liberty from the very beginning.
Point taken re: the driving. Poor example on my part.
“This was a completely arbitrary interference with liberty from the very beginning.”
It was hardly arbitrary. Like most interference with liberty in the past, it was done in the name of imposing religious beliefs, specifically Christian ones.
Every law is about balancing freedoms and the “no” voters have simply put a different priority on the various freedoms at issue than most of the people who read this site.
__________________
“Different priority” is a eupamism for “don’t care at all about others’ rights.” It is easy to place a low priority on a freedom you don’t exercise. A teetotaller cares nothing for banning Sunday sales because he doesn’t buy any day. He’s free to have a fridge sans Sweetwater. But he has zero business keeping it from mine any day of the week. I personally place no value on the freedom to play the guitar. I don’t even know how to do it. So let’s ban Friday guitar playing! If I can convince 51% of the voters that we should ban this, then the hell with the 49% who know how to play. We just place a “different priority” on the freedom to play guitar, right?
Just to be clear, I too think that Sunday alcohol bans do not serve a compelling purpose.
My point all along is just that it seems unfair to characterize people who support the ban as simply wishing to “restrict freedom”. And no, I don’t think that “different priorities” means the same as “don’t care about others’ rights”. It instead means that they value certain other rights more than the right to buy alcohol on Sunday. You may not see how any other rights can truly conflict with the right to purchase/sell alcohol on Sunday, but that doesn’t mean that such a dichotomy doesn’t exist.
Again, I’m not saying that dichotomy necessarily does exist, but it’s unfair to label supporters of the ban as “restrictors of freedom” if they have made a legitimate (although perhaps to you and me, skewed) value assessment to reach their conclusion.
I think that label applies perfectly…
” but it’s unfair to label supporters of the ban as “restrictors of freedom” if they have made a legitimate (although perhaps to you and me, skewed) value assessment to reach their conclusion.”
It’s entirely fair and accurate. Thier personal values have created a prohibitiion that applies to everyone. How is that not a restriction of freedom?
And what are the No-sayers’ reasons? If it’s church then that’s a violation.
Where are the No voters here? We want answers.
There aren’t any ‘no’ voters – just a few happy drunks clicking the wrong button.
Ale yeah!
You fellas been doing a bit of boozing, have you? Suckin back on grandpa’s old cough medicine?
I’ll come out of the closet and say this: I don’t mind *not* being able to buy alcohol on Sunday. It never really bothered me, I just planned ahead.
Why wouldn’t I want Sunday alcohol sales? It makes for shorter lines and smaller crowds at Trader Joe’s on Sunday mornings!
` It makes for shorter lines and smaller crowds at Trader Joe’s on Sunday mornings
“Shall the governing authority of (name of county or municipality) be authorized to permit and regulate package sales by retailers of both malt beverages and wine on Sundays between the hours of 12:30 P.M. and 11:30 P.M.?”
I should note that the bill authorizes two versions of the initiative.
‘malt beverages, wine, and distilled spirits’ vs. (!!) ‘both malt beverages and wine’
I won’t soon forget learning about Georgia’s Sunday booze sales ban the hard way. It was shortly after moving here and I was at the grocery store buying the ingredients for a special Sunday dinner to celebrate being in our new home. The cashier pointed out that she couldn’t sell me the wine I had carefully selected. Had to serve that rib roast with a nice iced tea. Now, THAT was a sin.
Almost identical experience. It was at the then Harris Teeter, now Kroger, on Briarcliff near Emory. Clerk told me he couldn’t sell me the bottle of wine I’d picked out. I figured, well, local ordinance — I’ll just have to find a store in a different precinct. So I asked him where I would have to go to buy carryout alcohol. His reply: “Tennessee.” I damn near died.
After having worked in the alcohol trade in another no-sales-on-Sunday state, I definitely enjoyed having a dedicated day off. I KNEW I wouldn’t get called into work, so I could make plans with friends (or have a lazy day after a busy week.)
If the county were to vote to allow Sunday sales, would Decatur have to hold its own election? Or would the county law apply automatically?
Mayor Floyd says no immediate plans to pass a measure. Says they’ll probably consider after consulting with local businesses.
Understandable, though I wonder how many businesses in Decatur sell alcohol that aren’t already open on Sundays? Ale Yeah is the only one that comes to mind.
He might mean the pubs too, in terms of any potential negatives.
So basically the right of the individual to have his rights not infringed by someone else’s religion (which is really the root of this law despite excuses to the contrary) will hinge on whether some bar owner agrees? Yeah, I don’t think the impact on business should be a consideration when removing a restriction on individual liberty.
Don’t attribute my assumption to the mayor. I’ll follow up and clarify.
I’m not! I promise! I am just arguing for fun!
My guess was incorrect. The mayor clarified that he was speaking of “those who could/would take advantage of the new law”.
Taking advantage how — selling booze to people who want to buy it? Oh dears! Only the gummit can save us!
Cheers!
I agree. It’ll get interesting if that’s the tack the City tries to take.
DM, do you know, or can you discover, how this will play out vis a vis county and city? If Dekalb goes one way can Decatur just go along, or would we have to have a separate vote? Or could Decatur go the opposite way (if Dekalb voters turn out to be wrongheaded about it)?
Decatur and DeKalb are separate local entities and would each vote, just like Chamblee, Stone Mountain, Doraville, Pine Lake, and the rest of the cities in the county.
It means you need to speak out if you want the issue on the ballot in November.
You can buy take-home booze Mon – Sat and the pubs somehow manage to survive those days. For that reason, I cannot find any credibility in a bar or pub claiming that Sunday take-home booze will harm them.
Not that any pub, to my knowledge, has made that argument.
would be interesting to see if Decatur acting prior to DeKalb County might make a difference in Trader Joe location selection…
We can only hope.
Suburban Plaza is not in the City.
Yet. (Begin Annexation-Related Overreaction…. NOW!)
I can’t imagine why Decatur wouldn’t want to be out front on this issue. Passing liquor sales on Sunday within the city limits only impacts a handful of businesses. I can only think of the little Kroger and a few convenience stores that sell take home booze. If we were to pass the law before our surrounding areas, we would certainly see an uptick in sales at these few businesses and I certainly don’t see the UJoint being any less crowded on a beautiful Sunday afternoon just because the Hop & Shop sells beer. What am I missing here?
Don’t forget Sherlock’s
I love Decatur… Many laughs reading these posts! Thank you
I’m starting the movement to ban M&M sales on even Tuesdays and the 30th of every 2nd month.
In college, I worked in a liquor store for a while. Saturday was the biggest beer sales day. Certain individuals would buy cases and cases and cases and cases of beer to sell illegally on Sunday… Now, we wouldn’t want to hurt their booming business model, would we?
A friend that works with the state legislature told me most of the opposition was from liquor store owners. They feel that Sunday sales would not out weigh the lower overhead of being open only six days a week. OK understandable, but there is obviously considerable demand for Sunday sales and the few individual businesses this will affect will still have the choice of opening on Sunday or not. Oh and there are some religious folks opposed also.
Liquor stores manage to profit, despite the competition with grocery and convenience stores, every other day of the week, so I see no reason why they can’t be profitable on Sunday.
Nothing preventing them from staying closed on Sunday either.
The major reason for voting “yes” in the poll was that frankly, I think its a major inconvenience that I am supposed to remember to buy my wine the day BEFORE my book club meets. I think its annoying to have to change out of my pjs at 9pm on Saturday to run out to Publix or other store to purchase a bottle of wine. However, I suspect counties like Cobb will still continue to inconvenience our members out there but they can always swing into Fulton on the way to our meeting.