Just Another CPSIA question.............

[Former_Member]

With all this CPSIA stuff, which Im finding everytime I go and read more of it, I need to take an aspirin. Im wondering, if your a crafter and you purchase your fabric and notions etc. from stores like JoAnne's Fabrics, Hobby Lobby, AC Moore, etc. wouldn't they need to have the fabric, notions, etc. already tested? Since they are selling to the public?
As a mother, if I were to go in to JoAnne's and buy fabric to make my child an outfit wouldn't they be required to make sure the fabric was already tested?

Just a thought.....

[bobbinalong]

I have said this same thing over and over. I can pull all of my kids' items. How is that making it safer for children if the big stores are still selling it?

[Former_Member]

Exactly!! If crafters are required to test, but not the chain stores, for one its not going to solve anything, but put little business people out of business. And I think in our economic times, we should be encouraging AMERICAN based home business' to thrive not fail.
What's that saying, charity starts at home.
I for one try to buy more local and would prefer to purchase something made here in the USA.
They need to start where the problem is, at the big manufacters and imports.

[Former_Member]

IMO, Congresspersons and Represenatives see these items as general use since they are not ready to be used by a child in the raw state until an adult makes something for a child out of them. Perhaps they erroneously think that all families are going to go to the big national chain department stores and franchised owned speciality stores to purchase every last item that their children will every need, the thought that some families have to make their own never even crossed their minds.
Now the CPSC the commission that oversees the law as written by these "Mable Tower" elected officials are coming to see that there is a lack of common sense in the law and are slowly starting to make a few exemptions on what materials need to be tested. Though they are basing on what they think is definative proof that there is no way that certain supplies could ever have lead levels above the limits, but they are not scientists nor crafters themselves. They can and do see conflicting test results based on whom is providing the data and at this time are simply acting as the jury at a trial.
If you are truely dismayed that the raw supplies are not required to be tested before Jane & Joe Public purchases them then write to your officials not as a micro business owner but as a parent that the economy has forced you to start making your children's necessities at home and that you want the same asurances that the supplies that you are buying are just as safe as the finished product you would have otherwise bought if the the money was there.

[bobbinalong]

I think it goes way beyond buying fabric. There are all sorts of items for kids to paint, to put together, kits, paints, paper, even a simple coloring book. It is massive. This is the most ignorant law I have ever heard of. I can't imagine what is going into all the other laws that are being written and passed right now. Pretty doggone scary, in my mind.

[Former_Member]

I agree that Congress probably only saw it as general use. But what about baby print fabrics?? In all honesty, we all know (I would think its common sense) that that fabric would only be used for babies or small children. How many adults do we know that would purchase a baby print to make themselves an outfit out of. Or how about Halloween? Do they realize that alot of parents make thier children Halloween costumes. Again, on the common sense, obviously Congress wasn't using the common sense card when they devised this law.

And bobbinalong,you've brought up another good point. Where does it stop? The coloring books, crayons, how about DVD's?

How do we know that toys on the shelves of Walmart and Target have been tested?

Scary, most definitly!

[BebeChicBoutique]

I've been thinking about the craziness of this law the last few days. I was relieved when they came out with the exemptions on fabrics, ribbons, elastic and so on and also not requiring testing for phthalates on materials that don't commonly have it in them. But the more I think about it, this law doesn't make anyone safer. Are they going to ban zippers in cushions and pillows used in furniture? Zippers and snaps on mommy's purse? Buttons on mommy's, daddy's, grandma's, big brother's shirts? Keys and keyrings. I see my little granddaughter put the cell phone in her mouth all the time. These things are not made specifically for children, but they are in their environment and they do put these things in their mouth. The government can't childproof the world. I think they should aim for the big culprits and we know who they are.

[Former_Member]

I know someone posted a link to a blog somewhere which had a list of items that were exempt. But for the life of me, I can't find it.

[BebeChicBoutique]

Oh, and one more thing. A lot of people (me included) cut the labels off anyway, so what good is all this tracking label stuff.

[SewFunDollClothes]

Excellent points BebeChicBoutique. I can't count the number of times my kids or granddaughter chewed on car keys, purse straps with buckles, our clothing as we held them, or slept on the floor, or couch cushions. Hmmm ... maybe if Congress had put in an "anything a child under 12 will touch" clause in this insane law, there would be more of an uproar from every sector and more people would see how stupidly overreaching it is!

[Former_Member]

BebeChicBoutique says:
I've been thinking about the craziness of this law the last few days. I was relieved when they came out with the exemptions on fabrics, ribbons, elastic and so on and also not requiring testing for phthalates on materials that don't commonly have it in them. But the more I think about it, this law doesn't make anyone safer. Are they going to ban zippers in cushions and pillows used in furniture? Zippers and snaps on mommy's purse? Buttons on mommy's, daddy's, grandma's, big brother's shirts? Keys and keyrings. I see my little granddaughter put the cell phone in her mouth all the time. These things are not made specifically for children, but they are in their environment and they do put these things in their mouth. The government can't childproof the world. I think they should aim for the big culprits and we know who they are.
------------------
I agree that this law doesn't make anyone safer. That's why I think there's a very good possibility that they'll start implementing more legislation like this that applies to more and more products, not just those intended for children. They'll say that the current laws don't do enough to "protect" children, so more action needs to be taken.

[BebeChicBoutique]

katandthefiddle says:
I know someone posted a link to a blog somewhere which had a list of items that were exempt. But for the life of me, I can't find it.

Here is a link to the whole big ugly document from CPSIA. Look around pages 30-45. I think you will find it there.

<http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia09/brief/leadfinalrule.pdf>

[Former_Member]

Thanks Bebe!! Im going to take an aspirin though before I venture back to reading it though. LOL

[Former_Member]

Okay, here's another thought to show how stupid this law is. I was reading through a section of the law in regards to childrens books. And if Im correct in reading it, libraries would be exempt. So, libraries could loan out books that are "potentionally hazardous" but anyone selling the same exact book the library has in a collection would have to make sure it complies with the law?