January 08, 2009


OK, so here's where knitting and government meet:

The new Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act – passed hastily to bar poisonous foreign products – also will require millions of American homecrafters to have each of their products tested at huge cost, ranging from $500 to $4000 per product – including their old stock which was manufactured before this law had even been thought up.

So government tried to do a good thing by banning lead toys from China and those beads that turned into the date-rape drug. But they derp-ed it up and forgot to exclude those of us who make baby things from home.

We in the group I belong to are unsure how this affects us. We do not receive monetary donations and we do not sell our items. But we better not be legally barred from making our preemie donations to the local hospitals because of some stupidly worded law. And I don't want people selling on Etsy or Ebay to be affected either.

Kuhr says all the homecrafters of the US 'will become criminals from February 10 if they continue to sell their homemade stock without the required certificate of compliance to prove that it had been tested for dangerous contents such as lead'.

From now on, while I'm knitting my preemie caps, I will be saying in a Beavis voice, "Breakin' the law, breakin' the law."

But seriously folks, we're running out of time before the law takes effect. I plan to make a complaint, and if you are a crafter, I would urge you to do the same.

Formal complaints against this act must be lodged before January 20 2009 Comments must be labeled: Section 102 Mandatory Third-Party Testing of Component Parts'. Lodge complaints to email Sec102ComponentPartsTesting@cpsc.gov

Posted by: Sarah at 11:56 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 297 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I read about this yesterday with regards to how it would affect thrift stores and others in the 2nd hand market. Yard sales will still be okay. I am glad that there has been such an uproar about this, and I hope they change the law.

Posted by: CaliValleyGirl at January 08, 2009 12:10 PM (irIko)

2 This doesn't make any sense! You, for example, are using products that have been purchased and thus should already have been tested before being put on the shelves. Why do they need to be tested again?!?

Posted by: Kiki at January 08, 2009 03:16 PM (P1eqB)

3 OK - I've sent my complaint as logically and politely as I can. I agree with Amritas that it's much more likely ignorance than malice; after all, isn't there some law about unintended consequences, to begin with? ;-)

Posted by: kannie at January 08, 2009 07:46 PM (iT8dn)

4 1. Can I get some gloves with MORE lead in them? Would be great for self defense... 2. if you get arrested, have the hubby post the location. I need some shoot-house practice, anyway. 3. If you ignore the law, like the 20 million or so illegal immigrants, likely the gummint will see it as a problem that's just too large to deal with. 4. Under the new administration, you'll be safe. Just mention one of these tried and true excuses: a. It's for the Children b. It's to help mother gaia, these are all eco-friendly yarns and stuff, made from free-range sheep's wool and all-organic polyester. c. I only knit Che-berets d. It's part of my islamic heritage! You are the infidel! Appease me!

Posted by: Chuck at January 09, 2009 05:46 AM (bQVIy)

5 Okay, so I read about this on HotAir too. And they have a video of a bonafide liberal who realizes "Oh, maybe over govt. regulation DOES hurt business." La - di - freakin - DUH! http://hotair.com/archives/2009/01/09/video-regulation-fan-discovers-inner-libertarian-when-it-hits-her-pocketbook/ Imagine that, increases in regulations/inspections actually then increases operation costs among businesses and then businesses decide to pull back or not do any business at all to avoid these additional costs. Businesses are in existence to make money first, social-appeasement second. Non-profits are about social-assistance first, money second. ItÂ’s not rocket science! While I do think not having lead in toys in a good thing - politicians have a tendency to write bills without thinking about real-world ramifications. That's usually because our politicians are ambition-driven law students who have spent their life campaigning but not actually working in the business world. The only thing these types of bills do in terms of a benefit are making it seem like some nimrod politician actually did something in office so he can have a talking point come the next election term. That's why people, especially small business advocates, have a problem with govt. intervention and regulation. We need politicians who know a thing or two about economics from practical experience, not just a Harvard econ 101 class. That way when regulations are created (like safety restrictions on children's toys) there is a way to achieve the mail goal - safety - without interfering in business and job production in our economy.

Posted by: BigD78 at January 09, 2009 11:25 AM (W3XUk)

6 BidD is correct...too many politicians are totally disconnected from the world of those who make and sell things. Too high a proportion of them are lawyers and/or have spent their entire careers in "public service." Sarah, I just linked this post at Chicago Boyz.

Posted by: david foster at January 09, 2009 12:59 PM (ke+yX)

7 I've been following this for quite sometime now. It's pretty ridiculous b'c it's so very vague on so many items. Even the labs you need to send the products to haven't been certified. The list is quite endless. Hopefully they'll get to work and modify this, I understand not wanting lead in kids' products but this law is taking it to an extreme. :-/

Posted by: Penny at January 11, 2009 03:27 PM (5y/PV)

8 > But they derp-ed it up Technogeeks already had a term for this: MUNG It's an acronym. It stands for MUNG Until No Good

Posted by: obloodyhell at January 12, 2009 11:40 PM (IdgIO)

9 > I was thinking the same thing myself, but the paranoid might object by pointing out that homecrafters could mix dangerous materials along with safe, store-bought ones. So expensive tests would be needed to verify the absence of toxic content. Next up: Restaurants will have to send out any dishes to be tested before serving to customers for bacterial, chemical, or other adulterants. This will be passed because someone inadvertently fed a child something and they got sick. ============================ IT'S ALL TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN!!! Surely you CARE about THE CHILDREN, don't you!?!?! ============================ I'm put in mind of an interchange in an old SF book from the 80s: ------- "Marxist truth!", sneered Skashkash. "Marx himself didn't believe it!" "[Prove it!]" "Very well," replied Skashkash. "First, Karl Marx held two values above all others -- the revolution and scientific truth. Second, Marx, a man of undoubted genius, died without ever finishing his magnum opus, 'Das Kapital'. A genius does not die without finishing his life's work - I could cite you examples as nauseum - but Marx lingered for years without finishing 'Das Kapital'." "So what? He got old and sick and couldn't write, but what he wrote was the truth." "No, the reason that Marx never finished his work was that his two prime values, revolution and scientific truth, were in conflict. He had, as you will doubtless recall, set up a progression of social orders, from chatel slavery, to feudalism, to capitalism, to what he called s o c i a l i s m - a kind of unspecified utopia. In fact, there was another step after capitalism available for his study, but he suppressed it, because it was incompatible with his notion of revolution. He called it the 'Oriental Mode of Production' and it was amply demonstrated in Chinese history. It is capitalism made subordinate to the state by means of innumerable petty regulations. You could describe it as enlightened petty despotism, or as symbiosis of the individual and the collective. Had Marx elected to follow scientific truth instead of revolution, he would have predicted what happened in the U.S. after the Great Depression. He would have been a major prophet." - Alexis A. Gilliland, 'Long Shot for Rosinante' -

Posted by: Obloodyhell at January 12, 2009 11:50 PM (IdgIO)

10 P.S. there comes a point beyond which spamguards are stupid and useless: "Your comment could not be submitted due to questionable content: c i a l i s" Note that I inserted spaces to get it past the spamguard. The offending componentof the post? "S o c i a l i s m" ----=======-- :-/ If there is a way to do it, you need to add spaces onto the ends of the offending term. And that's not going to stop any bot with a clue, but neither will it as-is.

Posted by: obloodyhell at January 12, 2009 11:54 PM (IdgIO)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
49kb generated in CPU 0.0113, elapsed 0.1308 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.1246 seconds, 157 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.