San Francisco is not a 24/7 city. And maybe that's okay.

Last call hits at 2 AM, the streets clear out shortly after, and by 3 AM the only action downtown is the power-washing crews hosing down the sidewalks. As one SF resident put it bluntly: "There is nothing to do from 2-3 AM downtown but get into trouble."

There's currently an assembly bill working its way through Sacramento that would extend last call to 4 AM on weekends in select areas. The deadline was supposed to be June 1, but like most things involving California's legislature, it may not make it on time. Color us shocked.

Here's where we'll offer a mildly contrarian take: the government shouldn't be telling adults when they can and can't buy a drink. If a bar owner wants to stay open until 4 AM and there's demand for it, let the market sort it out. The nanny-state impulse to regulate every hour of commerce is exactly the kind of thing that makes San Francisco feel smaller and sleepier than it needs to be.

But let's also be honest about what we are. We're not Buenos Aires, where the party doesn't start until midnight. We're not New York, where you can get a slice at 4 AM without a second thought. San Francisco has always been more of a "great dinner, couple of drinks, home by midnight" town — and there's a massive, tax-paying population that likes it that way.

The real question isn't whether SF should be a late-night city. It's whether the city should have the freedom to figure that out on its own, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, without Sacramento micromanaging the details.

One local summed up the late-night SF experience perfectly: "It's fine. You'll be bored though."

Honest tourism marketing, right there.