They won't recall cigarettes, but they are shutting down small crafters?

[#1]

The logic of the CPSIA, which I am just starting to delve into, is baffling me.

We know there are 38,000 harmful carcinogens in a single cigarette, and they kill people. Millions a year in fact. Yet they won't be recalled. They are allowed to be sold.

How many kids have died from an etsy item, or any other similar across U.S.? As far as I can tell, zero, or next to zero. How many kids get lead poisoning a year from items? I'm sure its under a hundred. (I'm checking on this.)

This CPSIA is so off-base. It's a giant profiteering scam using lead poisoning as an excuse, and the public is buying into it, because of course, we all want kids to be safe. But WHY NOT GO AFTER CIGARETTES FIRST?

Just my three cents for now-
Kristin

[Former_Member]

christinamaedesigns,

I am sorry for illnesses of the folks and family that you have listed, as well as your own, but it does not change the facts.

Exposure to the sun is not bad and will not cause skin cancer.
over exposure, however, can kill you.

Alcohol will not lead to liver disease.
Drinking like a like a sieve, of course, will take its
toll.

Passing through the stream of smoke from the tip of a cigarette will not cause you to keel over in death in x amount of years.
Smoking a bonfire's equivalent on a daily basis, just might.

Reading a heavily illustrated book from the early 1900s will never cause a lead induced coma.
Eating several novels may very well do one in.

Asthma and bronchitis can be present with or without the aid of smoke.

I'm big on analogizes LOL so here's another...
To cross a busy highway without looking will surely lead to getting hit by a car. One need only try it once or twice to find out.

We can safely conclude it is best to look both ways before crossing a street. This is real cause and effect.

I have known many people that suffer with both conditions (asthma and bronchitis) who have never smoked a day in their life nor had exposure to smoke and yet suffer these ailments. While I have also known many people that smoke, and yet are healthy and spry. I can not possibly conclude that smoking is the say all end all.

It is not good to conclude the cause with such surety when all too often it is an absent attribute to the "effect" you are experiencing. It could very well cause you not to look the other way for the real source of the problem.

Understand, it's not as though I would have no sympathy in the matter of lung disease.
My father died from what may have been asbestosis (disease that attacks the lungs via asbestos) so I do know first hand what it is like to watch someone struggle for every breath for a long fifteen years.

It was during this time that I considered the cause and effects of lung disease and disorders very seriously.

[ArtisticDetour]

Why don't we just "recall" everything YOU think is "bad"? Live and let live.

[MigotoChou]

Wow. What a great point you have there!

Mind if I add this to my rant when I'm talking to people about this??? :D

[Faeorain]

I never smoked a day in my life, but I lived in my parents house for 19 years, and they were chain smokers. I now suffer with asthma and recurring asthmatic bronchitis. I am allergic to smoke, and if I am around too much of it for too long, I come down with asthmatic bronchitis again, which half of the time develops into pneumonia.

I hear you on this one. Second hand smoke does poison, sicken children. Right now, nobody is protecting children from second hand smoke, yet common sense tells us it's a much bigger problem and risk than lead or toxins in some plastics.

[Faeorain]

To JuliaChicken...my illness is a direct result of the smoke. I was sick a hell of a lot during childhood when I lived at home, and when I moved away, miraculously I got better with hardly any complications with my asthma.

When I worked as a bartender for awhile out of desperation for cash, and I was out sick half of the time with the same ailments. When I lost that job...again, miraculously, I recovered.

When I go to visit my folks for a weekend, my symptoms start up again. These are not coincidences. Two doctors have confirmed the smoke is the most probable cause, and have advised me to avoid it at all costs.

[BikiniSandi]

I know the new laws are inconvenient for us, but remember when all the pet food was removed from the shelves here in America? And they traced the problem back to China? Well one guy got blamed for it all and his punishment was death.

I deal with the inconveniences of life in the US and I will have to obey the law or suffer the consequences like anybody else. But at least I won't be shot if I make a mistake. And I get to gripe about it outloud in a public forum online and still no fear of getting shot by order of my government.

We can do this folks. We don't have to like it to accept it. We can gripe till we're blue in the face. The law is there to protect the innocent from greedy businesses that don't care. We all have to abide by the same laws. It's not an attack on any one individual.

The innocent have always suffered right along with the guilty anytime a new rule is put into effect. It's just the way it is.

[Former_Member]

I also know that people banding together can make a difference, and have things changed. If politicians get enough voters hounding them, they will look at things, especially if it effects re-election.

[HorseCreekJewelry]

It is so funny how so many people are sweating over this in these forums. I certainly don't see Walmart or Children's Place fretting about this too much. Maybe it is just another way for "big business" to boot out the little guy...once again. I mean whats next? Mercury testing. Geez!

[Former_Member]

Still no one has listed any business that has been shut down by this, not just shut down in fear but actually SHUT DOWN by the government.

[Former_Member]

yoursandi says: "I know the new laws are inconvenient for us.....

I deal with the inconveniences of life in the US.....

We can do this folks. We don't have to like it to accept it. We can gripe till we're blue in the face. The law is there to protect the innocent from greedy businesses that don't care. We all have to abide by the same laws. It's not an attack on any one individual."

I think most of us don't think the government was "out to get us" when they passed this law. They simply didn't THINK about what was going to happen to smaller businesses.

With all due respect, yoursandi, this isn't an "inconvenience." This is subjecting small businesses making one item at a time to the same HUGE testing costs, in the THOUSANDS of dollars (sometimes the TENS of thousands!) that the big guys need to pay for bigger batches, and in most cases for items that don't contain lead or phthalates and have NEVER contained lead or phthalates. And oh, yes, we HAVE to pay for the testing even if we have certification from our own vendors that the supplies we use conform to the new standards.

And no, I CAN'T "do this." I simply can NOT, even if I could find a lab who'd take on my microbiz/hobby, afford to pay the hundreds and hundreds of dollars to have my stuff tested, especially not in a way that DESTROYS my one-of-a-kind items and eaves me no product. I CAN'T pass on testing costs that would make a $10 onesie more like $500.

It's not an "inconvenience." It's a badly-written ill-conceived law that needs to be fixed.

Sorry, that was jut about the first thing I read this morning and it kinda touched a nerve.....

Bahandsandfeet, the government hasn't shut down anyone over the CPSIA - YET. It's only been in effect for a couple weeks, and the CPSC isn't exactly bursting at the seams with enforcement staff - YET. That said, I don't want to be the target of some Attorney General with a point to make, nor do I think I'd find any volunteers here. Several states' Attorneys General have gone on record as saying they will fully prosecute anyone in violation of the CPSIA, regardless of size.

[sweetolivesoapworks]

Well I intend to chain smoke the the days away while reading lead painted vintage children's books until they can figure out a way to physically stop me.
I'm thinking about having fishsticks dipped in that high fructose corn syrup laced with Mercury for lunch......

[Former_Member]

And I will echo Generations.

yoursandi,

Maybe you don't understand the FULL impact of this law.

It is not "inconvenience" when the government BANS books.

It is not "inconvenience" when the government makes it impossible to have a small business.

It is not "inconvenience" - it is injustice, it is infractions, it is insane, but it is not inconvenience!

If you DO understand the law and feel that you can live contently on what the government giveth and what it taketh away you have that right. Of course, in the 1700s you would have been called a Tori LOL.

But even during that great battle for independence, many many people felt as you. Liberty can be won with or without you - but you will reap its rewards.

behandsandfeet,

First of all, the CPSC has issued a stay of inforcement - but that is only a small reason - and you aren't going to see swat teams and the national guard shutting down business at gun point. That's just not how it works LOL

Most businesses are run by law abiding people. After all, laws are ONLY good for the law abiding!

What you are seeing (if you are looking) are businesses removing stock that does not comply with the new limits.

For some, that may be ALL of their stock (like folks here at Etsy).

At the current $8,000 fine PER infraction (due to rise), and fear of recalls, refusals from retailers, and so on, businesses have no choice but to pull stock. Larger business (like the ATV-dirt bike industries)would have bees advised by their legal council to pull those items to avoid even GREATER financial ruin.

Come Feb 2010 (unless the "special" interest groups get their way and stop the stay) when small biz manufacturers can't afford to certify each and every component (even though those components were certified by the originator already) they will be forced to shut down - not by swat team, not by fear, but by the GOVERNMENT.

[Former_Member]

Coming from a family where my dad had 12 brothers and sisters, and he now has FOUR, because they all died slow deaths from lung cancer and emphysema, smoking all the way to the grave, i've seen the devestation that cigarettes can cause.

FYI all scientific data is taken from theories. We have no idea what the center of the Earth is made of. We just theorize that based on certain equations and minimal data that it is molten lead. You can never "PROVE" that our sun is made of Hydrogen and then a layer of Helium and then another layer and so on and so on. You can never PROVE that cigarettes do certain things to people but based on what we know about the lungs and what we know about cigarettes, we can theorize.

Even IF cigarettes didn't cause cancer (?????? i'm floored that an educated person would say something like that) Nicotine is highly addictive (I work in an addiction clinic so please dont try to say that it isn't) and that is reason enough to cease production. There is no comparison to alcohol to be made here.

I completely agree that lead in plastic is less a threat. Unless you cover your teething rings with lead paint.. carcinogens that you force on other people forces out the maxim LIVE AND LET LIVE.

[Former_Member]

well, cigarettes aren't MADE TO BE SOLD TO CHILDREN unlike the products covered by the CSIA

nice histronics though
next time try comparing things that actually are equivalent

[Former_Member]

Joyananda,

(I really am a debating fool - huh? lol)

You say no comparison with alcohol? Is alcohol not addictive? Is it not destructive? Or do you like to drink in moderation, so therefore, it's okay? Sorry, when writing things they may sound harsher than if I were to "say" them. I really don't want to be discourteous.

I hate that this keeps forcing a medical/scientific debate because, I am trying to expound the importance of personal freedoms and choices.

And that NO ONE has the right to FORCE upon me their personal choice.

If you want to drink at the dinner table with your family, who am I to report you? Do I answer to Hitler?

You want to smoke in your car with your family - your business - not mine!

You want your kids to play video games? Should I drop kick you?

You give your kids chips and soda? Should I call the cops?

I SHOULD mind my business - because really, I couldn't possibly know the entirety of YOUR situation, nor should it concern me.

And if I wanted to open a restaurant for SMOKERS ONLY, why can't I?

[Former_Member]

lol Julia...I bet if you opened a store for smokers-only you would get national attention! It would be hard to breathe, but that made me laugh out loud when I just read it.

[Former_Member]

SpoiledKitty says:
"well, cigarettes aren't MADE TO BE SOLD TO CHILDREN unlike the products covered by the CSIA

nice histronics though
next time try comparing things that actually are equivalent"

True, but having grown up in a house where I probably inhaled the equivalent of a pack a day for my first 17 years, ALL of it second-hand smoke, even though I was not of legal smoking age, in a situation where I had no say or consent in the matter, I'd say it's not completely and totally irrelevant to compare the dangers of each as they apply to the safety and health of children.

[Former_Member]

Second-hand smoke is a proven cancer-causer. Great people and parents keep it away from others-unfortunatlly there is a segment of society that doesn't care. :(

[Former_Member]

Julia - You said you don't want to seem discourteous, but your post sounds like hysterics and doesn't make sense. Maybe it's because you used "YOU" in everything and none of those things apply to me. I don't drink, I don't have kids and I don't smoke.

Anyhow, the reason there is no comparison to alcohol is because it is possible to drink without becoming dependant, as opposed to cigarettes. Also, secondhand alcohol doesn't cause cancer, asthma or bronchitis, but secondhand smoke does. Therefore, drinking at the dinner table is a complete 180 from smoking at the dinner table.

Actually smoking in a car with other people is outlawed in certain places. Where I live is one of those places.

Why are you bringing Hitler into this. Also, potato chips and video games don't cause cancer. Anyway, you might be able to open a restaurant for smokers only, but that doesn't have anything to do with the discussion.

[Former_Member]

More kids die every year drowning in five gallon buckets than have ever died from lead exposure in the last 10 years, but nobody's banning five gallon buckets.

[Former_Member]

apples and oranges.

[Former_Member]

Joyananda,

here is my post that is in question...


"I really am a debating fool - huh? lol)

You say no comparison with alcohol? Is alcohol not addictive? Is it not destructive? Or do you like to drink in moderation, so therefore, it's okay? Sorry, when writing things they may sound harsher than if I were to "say" them. I really don't want to be discourteous.

I hate that this keeps forcing a medical/scientific debate because, I am trying to expound the importance of personal freedoms and choices.

And that NO ONE has the right to FORCE upon me their personal choice.

If you want to drink at the dinner table with your family, who am I to report you? Do I answer to Hitler?

You want to smoke in your car with your family - your business - not mine!

You want your kids to play video games? Should I drop kick you?

You give your kids chips and soda? Should I call the cops?

I SHOULD mind my business - because really, I couldn't possibly know the entirety of YOUR situation, nor should it concern me.

And if I wanted to open a restaurant for SMOKERS ONLY, why can't I?"

"Julia - You said you don't want to seem discourteous, but your post sounds like hysterics and doesn't make sense. Maybe it's because you used "YOU" in everything and none of those things apply to me. I don't drink, I don't have kids and I don't smoke."

"You" as in the plural pronoun of the second person.


"Anyhow, the reason there is no comparison to alcohol is because it is possible to drink without becoming dependant, as opposed to cigarettes. Also, secondhand alcohol doesn't cause cancer, asthma or bronchitis, but secondhand smoke does. Therefore, drinking at the dinner table is a complete 180 from smoking at the dinner table."

Actually, quite possible to smoke without addiction. I personally have several Amish neighbors that smoke casually.

And second hand alcohol could be summed up very simply... drunk driving.

"Actually smoking in a car with other people is outlawed in certain places. Where I live is one of those places."

Clear infringement of our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.


"Why are you bringing Hitler into this. Also, potato chips and video games don't cause cancer. Anyway, you might be able to open a restaurant for smokers only, but that doesn't have anything to do with the discussion."

Hitler banned smoking.
Haven't you heard that potato chips contain MSG, preservatives, additives, trans-fat, and all those cancer causers?

You forgot soda.... all that sugar? ADD, tooth decay, weight gain! And you (plural pronoun - not the hysterical pronoun) can't give them diet soda - artificial sweeteners are even worse!

Video games --- highly addictive and there's a list longer than the long arm of the law on their ill effects on child development.

As far as a restaurant for smokers, for only those who want the smoke - Nope, not allowed to. Big Govt says no.

And why do I reply? the answer lies in the first line of my last post...


"I really am a debating fool - huh? lol)"

[Former_Member]

Julia seriously, your Amish neighbours don't buy Marlboro Reds.
Not all potato chips contain all that crap and since when did soda come into it.
Hitler banned smoking.. ok.. he also did a ton of other stuff, bringing Hitler into a discussion is a desperate distraction from the point of the discussion, please refrain from doing that.

Banning smoking 30 feet around the perimetre of all public places is not an infringement of constitutional rights. Where does it say in the constitution that you have a right to smoke. By the way smokers lounges do exist.

Again, you're bringing things into the discussion that have nothing to do with it. You're defending cigarette smoke but pointing out the evils of sugar. Why don't you bring crack cocaine into it.

[Former_Member]

Joyananda,

If you would only take the time to "hear" what I am saying.

I fear that you know the Constitution as well as you know my neighbors.

How easy we make it for the government to rob us of our liberties when don't even know we have them to begin with.

[Former_Member]

"How easy we make it for the government to rob us of our liberties when don't even know we have them to begin with"

RIGHT ON......