Posted on 01/06/2009 9:37:15 AM PST by Question Liberal Authority
Barring a reprieve, regulations set to take effect next month could force thousands of clothing retailers and thrift stores to throw away trunkloads of children's clothing.
The law, aimed at keeping lead-filled merchandise away from children, mandates that all products sold for those age 12 and younger -- including clothing -- be tested for lead and phthalates, which are chemicals used to make plastics more pliable. Those that haven't been tested will be considered hazardous, regardless of whether they actually contain lead.
"They'll all have to go to the landfill," said Adele Meyer, executive director of the National Assn. of Resale and Thrift Shops.
The new regulations take effect Feb. 10 under the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, which was passed by Congress last year in response to widespread recalls of products that posed a threat to children, including toys made with lead or lead-based paint.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Common sense thrown out again because of yet another liberal nanny state law.
It does more narm than good. It hurts the poor more than helps. They don’t care. They THINK they’ve helped, that’s all that matters.
They could have easily put exemptions in for non-profits. Not that I’m for the law, but they didn’t even do that. The people who supposedly know better than we do how to live our lives, cannot add a provision in to stop stupid stuff like this from happening.
Morons.
Just how are they supposed to enforce this?
Industrial grade, Nanny State idiocy.
YES WE CAN’T!
Nevermind.
Believe it or not...lead was used in the middle ages and early Renaissance as roofing material for Gothic cathedrals.
If its good enough for those magnificent Houses of God, then it’s good enough for me.
Maybe we should be like the FR of old and work on doing something about this. There is a month before it is to be enacted. Just lmk where to start.
Thank you for posting this - check the last post.
This is crazy - and no one knows about it!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2158470/posts
When I was young my I used to make stained glass projects utilizing lead solder. Never had a problem. Sounds like more Nannyism.
A round-about way to eliminate yard/garage sales (from which the gubmint generally doesn’t receive tax revenue)?
Just wonderin’
“They’ll all have to go to the landfill,” said Adele Meyer, executive director of the National Assn. of Resale and Thrift Shops.
WRONG.
You now need a permit to dump something that might have lead in it in a landfill.
According to a link a Freeper posted the other day, the thrift stores will be “Grandfathered” in.
Whether that is true or not, I don’t know.
Exactly. They put untested children’s clothing in the category of “banned hazardous substance,” which means that introducing it into “interstate commerce” is prohibited.
And given the way the courts have ruled on drug cases, “interstate commerce” involves giving it away to your neighbor.
There is a Welsh variant of the Italian calzone that includes a bread "handle". The miners handled only that "handle" when eating the stew stuffed bread, then tossed away the "handle". Even then they were quite aware of the consequence of consuming lead.
Yeah and their lawyer friends who are going to have the class action suits where the lawyers are the only ones who get anything.
And how long did all the “lead handlers” in your family, live to be?
Only sell stuff that is for really really small adults.
8-)
Mostly into their mid 80's except for those who died from tuberculosis epidemics that swept through the villages. The cemetery at Ysbty Ystwyth shows whole families wiped out in a matter of months. My great grandfather lived from 1842 to 1921. A good 79 years with 19 children.
Wherever dogooders tread, real people suffer real harm.
Remember to look at every issue that the left pushes from the viewpoint of
“how does this further the destruction of the traditional family?”
That is the root goal of all their policies.
This one’s easy. Second hand clothing is the way to clothe a large family. Remove that ability, and you make it a lot more (prohibitively) expensive to have a large family.
More of a direct attack on families.
Make children’s clothing more expensive means fewer children and families.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.