Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: What do you think of the Blue Law in Bergen County?
I like it, shopping centers/malls should be closed on Sundays. 53 36.05%
Well, It should be at least half day open. 10 6.80%
I don't like it, everything should be open all week as it is else where. 70 47.62%
I don't care 14 9.52%
Voters: 147. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-12-2009, 03:04 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,480,002 times
Reputation: 24590

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny View Post
Because the principle is the same.
no no no, bcdq. the principle may be the same, but you are expanding it beyond the scope of this situation. after you brought up these examples earlier that were beyond this situation, i qualified my point by saying "within reason." when i say stuff like i want more freedom, normal people dont say "well, you want freedom to murder people and steal other peoples stuff?" because they understand that thats beyond the scope of what im talking about and if we expanded the discussion id clearly exclude extreme circumstances.

i think its pefectly fine for you to take the opposing side but i dont think this has to go into exactly what is unacceptable for businesses to do and what isnt. i am not saying they should start mowing lawns or play loud music while people are sleeping. im just supporting their ability to open for business. i think that the reason why you use exaggerated examples is because you cant think of an equivalent example that people would find obnoxious so you choose something like playing drums in someone's yard at 1am.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-12-2009, 04:07 PM
 
19 posts, read 48,032 times
Reputation: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny View Post
.
I expected my last post to generate such a response from you. Any negative connotations you detect are mostly in jest but a direct response to your "get a clue" and "ignorance" comments in the beginning. I had an idea of the way you were going to handle this. I like to crack jokes while I'm debating. I can 100% gaurantee you that I am not angry or upset with you in any way. Even though your posts are rampant with hostility.

That aside...

The debate between you and I is not about whether the blue laws are right or just. That is between you and CNJ. No, our debate is me trying to show you that those against the blue laws have valid points to make. I find it comically ironic that you are calling me narrow minded and irrational. What is important to you may not be important to them. Not because they are being irrational but because they have different needs than you. Their feelings on the subject are no less rational than yours. It just so happens to be on the opposing side of the argument. You don't agree with them obviously, since you're on the other side but you are not the decider as to whose opinion is right or wrong. All you can do is express yours. What I was trying to do was show you why they think their way. But perhaps you're correct. Maybe I can't articulate myself well enough to make someone so stubborn understand. Fine, I'll own that. That's on me. But saying that because you don't understand my point, means it's illogical and unreasonable makes as much sense as me saying that because you don't understand my point means you are illogical and unreasonable. Point, counter-point. Everything works both ways which was the basis for my entire discussion. I know you think I'm putting words in your mouth or imagining your real thoughts but to me they are obvious in your posts. They just have to be read by someone who has a different view than yours.

I could care less whether you are "letting me off the hook" or think I look foolish. I know anything I say can and does have a rebuttle. That's why it's a debate. I have no face to save. I am new here and I don't know anyone. This is a debate with no name people I will probably never meet. I just felt like joining in on the discussion. I conceded because it is a trivial subject to me and the argument wasn't going anywhere. Not because I believe you are right or that I have to run and hide. Honestly, where do you see this discussion going? Let's say by some miracle I happen to come up with a point that makes sense to you. Will that change your point of view on the subject? It's not as if the "winner" of this debate will decide the fate of the blue laws. Maybe you feel they will. I stand by everything I have said and I'm moving on to spend some time with my family. Wait, but it's not Sunday. I am going to try and give you the last word because I'm sure it means more to you than it does to me. I can't promise you anything though. I'm a little stubborn too sometimes and can't help myself when the openings are so obvious. So by all means, tear me down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2009, 04:09 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,085 posts, read 8,755,669 times
Reputation: 2691
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
no no no, bcdq. the principle may be the same, but you are expanding it beyond the scope of this situation. after you brought up these examples earlier that were beyond this situation, i qualified my point by saying "within reason." when i say stuff like i want more freedom, normal people dont say "well, you want freedom to murder people and steal other peoples stuff?" because they understand that thats beyond the scope of what im talking about and if we expanded the discussion id clearly exclude extreme circumstances.
No, no, no captain d-bag. It's the same situation. In both cases it's an issue of the community having the right to tell businesses when they can and can't do business on the basis of the community's decision as to whether certain hours are reasonable or not.

Your problem is apparently that you think it's unreasonable for Bergen County to have the blue laws. That's fine. But you go the extra step in saying it's "unfair" for the community in Bergen County to decide what's reasonable, but you then turn around and say it's "within reason" for a community to do the same thing based on your own opinion of what's "reasonable". Again with your typical double-standard, just like how you go to the Borgata to avoid "lower class" people while at the same time seeking affordable housing for your minority MIL and insisting that she, unlike other minorities and people who can't afford more expensive things (such as the Borgata), is somehow NOT "lower class".

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
i think its pefectly fine for you to take the opposing side but i dont think this has to go into exactly what is unacceptable for businesses to do and what isnt.
Of course it has to go into that, because that's what you're arguing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
i am not saying they should start mowing lawns or play loud music while people are sleeping.
Right, you're arguing that in those cases it's "within reason" for the community to tell businesses when they can be open or when they have to refrain from doing business.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
im just supporting their ability to open for business.
Except in the case of those businesses that want to do business when you think it isn't "within reason". So it's entirely about "what is unacceptable for businesses to do and what isnt", and when it is acceptable or not, and what "within reason" means.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
i think that the reason why you use exaggerated examples is because you cant think of an equivalent example that people would find obnoxious so you choose something like playing drums in someone's yard at 1am.
My examples aren't that exaggerated. It's the same situation. A community feels that having businesses open at a certain time affects the quality of life in the community and thereby damages their QOL and that can lead to loss of property values, privacy, etc. The only difference is that you consider one example to be "extreme" and the other to be "within reason". Well, you're wrong. Both are "within reason"; it's reasonable for a community to make these decisions and to define what's resonable. What you are arguing is that everyone should accept your opinion that one situation is "extreme" and therefore unreasonable while the other situation is "within reason". And when it's pointed out to you, you don't know how to respond except to reiterate your untenable position.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2009, 04:22 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,480,002 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny View Post
Well, you're wrong.
nope, you're wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2009, 04:54 PM
 
3,307 posts, read 9,342,412 times
Reputation: 2423
It's fine if Bergen County wants to do this, but they have to realize that, just like the forced full-serve law, it contributes to the perception of NJ as a business-unfriendly "nanny" state. Eventually that reputation is going to hurt the state as more businesses move out and fewer businesses move in. Many would say that's already happening.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2009, 02:05 AM
 
Location: Paramus, NJ
501 posts, read 1,425,206 times
Reputation: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
nope, you're wrong.
*sighs*
Johnny, we gotta let this guy go. He'll just be stubborn as a haystack and corn fields.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pcity View Post
It's fine if Bergen County wants to do this, but they have to realize that, just like the forced full-serve law, it contributes to the perception of NJ as a business-unfriendly "nanny" state. Eventually that reputation is going to hurt the state as more businesses move out and fewer businesses move in. Many would say that's already happening.
We still have a lot of businesses opening up in NJ. Even if the global economy is still going amuck (and also, all those corruption stories raining like dew drops), it's not going to stop new/spreading businesses from showing up. We live in two metro-suburban areas filled with people.
I also understand that it may take a few years for new businesses to be built compared to other states that take about an year. (Probably, that's where the perception comes from.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2009, 08:17 AM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,480,002 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown Memory View Post
*sighs*
Johnny, we gotta let this guy go. He'll just be stubborn as a haystack and corn fields.
no less stubborn than you guys. his example is wrong. he wants to equate mowing lawns in the middle of the night to opening stores during the day because they are both things the community doesnt want. they arent equal. just like mowing the lawns in the middle of the night isnt equal to murder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2009, 08:26 AM
 
Location: Home
1,482 posts, read 3,118,194 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcity View Post
It's fine if Bergen County wants to do this, but they have to realize that, just like the forced full-serve law, it contributes to the perception of NJ as a business-unfriendly "nanny" state. Eventually that reputation is going to hurt the state as more businesses move out and fewer businesses move in. Many would say that's already happening.
I disagree. Being this close to NYC and having as much landspace devoted to commercial development (and many highways servicing it) NJ is still desirable for that kind of development/buisness.

The Full Serve law is also fine and has little to do with the Blue Laws. It is usually brought out by people who are used to pumping their own and complain about poor service at one station or another.

"Full serve" used to mean a hell of a lot more one time. 20 years ago guys would ask if you wanted your windows washed or oil checked. They would also check tire pressure. You were SUPPOSED to tip them for this, but few did (they thought they were somehow paying for the additional service by getting gas) and between that, and profit minded/minimal staff owners/managers w ended up with stations that charge you for air and, if you are lucky, have water in the bins for winshield washing.

I guess the only comparison to the Blue laws in this is that if the full serve law was repealed, the price of gas would not go down as many have stated. NJ had the cheapest gas in most of the nation, there is no commercial motivation to lower it further. No, we would be charged the same as we are now for self serve, and an added fee would be placed on the full serve. This would be similar to saying that somehow there would be less traffic on Saturday if the malls were open Sunday. Nowhere has this been proven and it is just a false statement intended to give creedence to the idea of opening on Sunday.

Honestly? I think the ONLY thing unfair about the Sunday closings are for the Orthodox Jews who are not allowed to work (and in some cases/times, do ANY labor/etc) no Saturday. I would have to look up the specifics on that, but suffice to say, THEY are the only ones unfairly effected by these laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2009, 03:18 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,085 posts, read 8,755,669 times
Reputation: 2691
Quote:
Originally Posted by k0bun View Post
I expected my last post to generate such a response from you. Any negative connotations you detect are mostly in jest but a direct response to your "get a clue" and "ignorance" comments in the beginning. I had an idea of the way you were going to handle this. I like to crack jokes while I'm debating. I can 100% gaurantee you that I am not angry or upset with you in any way. Even though your posts are rampant with hostility.
Oh, I see. You want everyone to believe that your hostility and rudeness was entirely "in jest" while my hostility and rudeness were not. Right. Now you're just trying to backpedal, and it's very transparent. Just own up to your own hostility and anger, don't try to pass off your rudeness as being "in jest", that's very obviously not true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k0bun View Post
That aside...

The debate between you and I is not about whether the blue laws are right or just. That is between you and CNJ. No, our debate is me trying to show you that those against the blue laws have valid points to make.
And I'm still waiting to hear what those "valid points" are. And "valid points" is a vague term; their points are "valid" in the sense that they are genuine opinions and ideas, but not necessarily "valid" in that they are right, or fair.

Furthermore, the debate between you and me IS about the fairness of the blue laws. You're trying to talk out of both sides of your mouth, arguing against blue laws while then saying you're OK with them. You're being openly disingenuous. In one post you "agree" with the reasons for the blue laws and with our county's right to enforce such laws, then you turn around and talk about how the county listened to me and/or those like me unfairly, since I am demanding "more rights" than others by supporting these laws.

You vacillate between points so that you can always (or so you think) pop up later and say you "agreed" with something, as if you're not partial or as if I (or whomever you're arguing) am (is) being irrational. On the one hand you "agree" and on the other hand you claim it's demanding "more rights". Of course, lost in all this is the issue of those who want to squelch blue laws, since they want more rights than those of us who support blue laws. We only want one day for no business with open business the other 6 days; those against the blue laws want 7 days for business and ZERO days of closed retail business. Yet somehow you distort this to say the non-compromise of all 7 days serving the wants of some is fair. If you have a valid point, then make it already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k0bun View Post
I find it comically ironic that you are calling me narrow minded and irrational. What is important to you may not be important to them. Not because they are being irrational but because they have different needs than you. Their feelings on the subject are no less rational than yours. It just so happens to be on the opposing side of the argument. You don't agree with them obviously, since you're on the other side but you are not the decider as to whose opinion is right or wrong. All you can do is express yours. What I was trying to do was show you why they think their way.
I find it sadly ironic that you're telling me that my "side of the argument" is irrational yet you can't even articulate what that "side" is. Or, perhaps you choose not to articulate it, since you know that if you articulate it expressly you will be unable to rationally maintain your position.

Let me spell it out for you:
"My side" - Shopping brings congestion and noise and detracts from our quality of life, so as community members we have a right to enforce a law, if there is a majority, that limits the shopping in our county. Since people do want to shop, but some want to limit shopping, a compromise should be reached. To eliminate only one day of shopping per week, and for it to be the shortest retail business day of the week, is more than fair to the businesses and the minority of people who do not want to limit retail businesses through blue laws. This is a more than fair compromise, since we infringe as little as possible upon retail, but still get at least a little of the quality of life enhancement "our side", who is the majority, wants.

"Their side" - It would be more convenient to shop if retail was permitted on Sunday for 6 to 8 hours in addition to the 12 hours a day the other 6 days of the week. There may be people who want sundays closed to retail business, for whatever their reasons are, but it would be more convenient to have all 7 days a week open, just in case I want to shop Sunday also. This "side" may be the minority group, but we think a fair compromise with the other "side" is to give them zero days and we get 7 days. We think that's fair because we get 7 days of what we want and they get no days of what they want.

Now, look at that and try telling me exactly what I'm not seeing about how their "side" is rational, as you claim it is. Tell me how it's "rational" to consider it "fair" or a "compromise" when one side isn't willing to give up anything. Yet, you tell me that I'm "demanding more rights" by wanting a compromise that is heavily favoring the other side of the issue.

Are you really this stupid? Or are you playing dumb to avoid admitting that you're wrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by k0bun View Post
But perhaps you're correct. Maybe I can't articulate myself well enough to make someone so stubborn understand. Fine, I'll own that. That's on me.
Here you go with your disingenous, two-faced crap again. You say that you'll "own that", as if you're finally taking responsibility for your own inability to articulate your own view rationally. But in reality, you're not owning anything, because you qualify it all by saying, "Maybe I can't articulate myself well enough to make someone so stubborn understand." So, you're not owning anything, really; you're pinning it on me and the stubbornness you allege that I have. Just saying "I'll own that" means nothing when what you identified, that you will "own", is someone ELSE'S shortcoming (that you are alleging, yourself). How can you own the stubbornness you allege me to have? You can't. Just more stupidity pouring out of your posts, dripping with duplicity and disingenuousness.

I'd love it if you did actually "own" one of your actual deficiencies, of which there are many.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k0bun View Post
But saying that because you don't understand my point, means it's illogical and unreasonable makes as much sense as me saying that because you don't understand my point means you are illogical and unreasonable. Point, counter-point. Everything works both ways which was the basis for my entire discussion.
It's not my mere stating that your point is irrational which makes it so; I have shown where your arguments fall apart, where you contradict yourself, and how your emotionally-fueled responses lack logic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k0bun View Post
I know you think I'm putting words in your mouth or imagining your real thoughts but to me they are obvious in your posts. They just have to be read by someone who has a different view than yours.
If it's so obvious, then show me where it is obvious in anything I said that I am demanding "more rights" than anyone else. I've asked several times for you to show this, and still all you do is make the allegation without backing it up with facts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k0bun View Post
I could care less whether you are "letting me off the hook" or think I look foolish. I know anything I say can and does have a rebuttle. That's why it's a debate. I have no face to save. I am new here and I don't know anyone. This is a debate with no name people I will probably never meet. I just felt like joining in on the discussion. I conceded because it is a trivial subject to me and the argument wasn't going anywhere. Not because I believe you are right or that I have to run and hide. Honestly, where do you see this discussion going? Let's say by some miracle I happen to come up with a point that makes sense to you. Will that change your point of view on the subject? It's not as if the "winner" of this debate will decide the fate of the blue laws. Maybe you feel they will. I stand by everything I have said and I'm moving on to spend some time with my family. Wait, but it's not Sunday. I am going to try and give you the last word because I'm sure it means more to you than it does to me. I can't promise you anything though. I'm a little stubborn too sometimes and can't help myself when the openings are so obvious. So by all means, tear me down.
Honestly, I see this discussion as leading to a better understanding by those on one side of the issue or the other, or both. I'm not asking you or anyone else to blindly accept anything; but, if we're going to discuss it, the least you can do is discuss the issue rationally and be honest.

I find it hard to believe that you're being rational or honest when you tell me and the others here who support blue laws that we're "demanding more rights" in doing so. I find it hard to believe that you're being honest when you put words in my mouth and allege that I have said certain things when I didn't. I find it hard to believe you're being honest when I point out that I never said such things as you allege yet you STILL tell me you never put such words in my mouth.

Why not just discuss the topic? It's like you want to discuss me and what you hate about me and ignore the topic of this thread. Is that what you want? If so, start a thread about that, this thread has a topic already, and that topic is Blue Laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2009, 03:20 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,085 posts, read 8,755,669 times
Reputation: 2691
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
no less stubborn than you guys. his example is wrong. he wants to equate mowing lawns in the middle of the night to opening stores during the day because they are both things the community doesnt want. they arent equal. just like mowing the lawns in the middle of the night isnt equal to murder.
They are equal. They are quality of life issues. You keep saying they're not equal, but you fail to say how. You're just being stubborn for the sake of argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top