A Law Requiring All Ducks to Wear Long Pants
The Kansas City Star is reporting about a unique law in Missouri — a ban on all yellow margarine. Now, it was only recently that I discovered the difference between butter and margarine, and I couldn’t believe that anyone might actually try to ban margarine in Missouri. Now, imagine my shock in learning that such a law has been on the books since the 19th century.
Luckily, this law has never been enforced. Even so, a Kansas City lawmaker is trying to have the law repealed, giving Missourians the smooth yellowy freedom they deserve. And yet, I ponder, who really cares? I mean, the law hasn’t been enforced and yet this lawmaker is taking the time to have it repealed. Is the inert I-Can’t-Believe-It’s-Not-Butter ban causing so much damage as to warrant such attention? Are there not more urgent issues to deal with? So, which is worse: having a useless uniformed law on the books, or having an elected official waste time and money to repeal it?
This seems like the kind of thing they deal with down in Springfield.
I think it’s worth it to remove it. There’s a risk that someone will try to enforce it at some point if you leave it on the books.
Comment by Sarah Brodsky — December 17, 2008 @ 3:45 p.m.
I’m inclined to agree with Sarah. Moreover, the longer they spend repealing the unenforced, senseless laws of yesteryear, the more time they won’t be passing the unenforceable, senseless laws of tomorrow.
Comment by Josh Smith — December 17, 2008 @ 4:22 p.m.
Both great points. Legislators should really make a regular ongoing practice of removing bad or outdated laws from the books. In fact, a great and productive legislative session could comprise nothing but efforts to strike down old laws.
Ideally, though, every new law should have a sunset built in, so we don’t just accumulate neverending legal detritus over time by default.
Comment by Eric D. Dixon — December 17, 2008 @ 5:28 p.m.
I love the idea of a special session dedicated to nothing but removal of obsolete, stupid and impractical laws. That would be the best money the state ever spent.
Comment by David Stokes — December 18, 2008 @ 12:08 p.m.
Frankly this law does not past constitutional muster and most do not. If anything let the idiots that want to enforce “blue laws” be the ones to pay for their removal via the judiciary branch. Punitive damages applied to those people wasting time with these archaic laws seems far more agreeable to me.
If the Legislature wants to waste its time repealing these laws let it be as riders to bills they want passed instead of the pork that hits us in the pocketbook!
Comment by Michele Whiting — December 21, 2008 @ 9:04 p.m.