OUTRAGEOUS! Ponies & the Consumer Products Safety Commission Improvement Act

As per request from another member there,

Jen from the LPS Forum said:
Second hand and thrift stores don't have to do lead testing. It only applies to new products. A lot of people are confused because the law is so vague and blankets a lot of items; which would explain why a lot of those stores still have signs up.
Article straight from our government:
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In February 2009, new requirements of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) take effect. Manufacturers, importers and retailers are expected to comply with the new Congressionally-mandated laws. Beginning February 10, 2009, children’s products cannot be sold if they contain more than 600 parts per million (ppm) total lead. Certain children’s products manufactured on or after February 10, 2009 cannot be sold if they contain more than 0.1% of certain specific phthalates or if they fail to meet new mandatory standards for toys.
Under the new law, children’s products with more than 600 ppm total lead cannot lawfully be sold in the United States on or after February 10, 2009, even if they were manufactured before that date. The total lead limit drops to 300 ppm on August 14, 2009.
The new law requires that domestic manufacturers and importers certify that children’s products made after February 10 meet all the new safety standards and the lead ban. Sellers of used children’s products, such as thrift stores and consignment stores, are not required to certify that those products meet the new lead limits, phthalates standard or new toy standards.
click to continue reading..


This was in an article written more than a week ago by the media:
REGULATION
Lead testing law won't apply to thrift stores
Federal regulators say secondhand stores won't be required to test children's merchandise for lead.
By Alana Semuels
January 9, 2009
After a barrage of complaints, federal regulators shifted gears Thursday and said they would no longer require that used children's clothing, toys and other items sold at secondhand stores be tested for lead.
click to continue reading..

Another article from the media Posted: January 12, 2009:
Resellers breathe sigh of relief after lead-testing law is eased
Secondhand stores won't have to check all items for children
[...] But after an onslaught of complaints from the resale industry and others, federal regulators shifted gears last week and said they would no longer require that used children's clothing, toys and other items sold at secondhand stores be tested for lead.
click to continue reading this article...

You can visit the federal government cpsc website for more information about the new lead law and the health concerns associated with lead:
http://www.cpsc.gov/
Information on the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA)

Jen from LPS Forum said:
The thing is, the resellers are held accountable if something they sell harms a child.


Jen from LPS Forum said:
Update with good news for retailers on this law:
Children's product makers get 1-year extension on lead-testing law
ACC SmartBrief | 02/03/2009
The Consumer Product Safety Commission voted last week to give U.S. toy makers and producers of children's products an extra year to meet lead- and chemical-testing requirements before their products can go on the market. The measure was set to go into effect Feb. 10, and while the delay gives the commission more time to set guidelines for testing products and gives businesses relief from paying for the testing, retailers say it doesn't help them in determining which products will meet federal lead standards.
source


Children's product sellers get 1-year reprieve on lead testing
The Consumer Product Safety Commission votes to hold off on some requirements that would have forced many firms to spend tens of thousands of dollars to check toys, clothing and other goods.
By Alana Semuels
January 31, 2009
Federal regulators on Friday postponed some testing requirements that would have forced many companies to pay ten of thousands of dollars to check children's products for lead content, giving manufacturers and retailers a one-year reprieve.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission deferred the deadline, originally Feb. 10, by which manufacturers and importers of children's goods needed to test every item to ensure it didn't contain more than 600 parts per million of lead. They also have an extra year to test for phthalates, chemicals often used in plastic.
Read the rest at the source.

 
a new goodwill just opened this weekend here, and it has tons of kids items, toys, and clothes... so i'm assuming it doesn't apply to thrift stores
 
well that's a relief seeing that it doesn't affect second hand stores because that's my main pony source.
 
a new goodwill just opened this weekend here, and it has tons of kids items, toys, and clothes... so i'm assuming it doesn't apply to thrift stores

well that's a relief seeing that it doesn't affect second hand stores because that's my main pony source.


It does apply to thrift stores.. Luckily for us though, some of them haven't done anything about the new laws yet. If something doesn't change in the law soon though...our favorite sourcees for ponies will dry up! Right now I am thrifting more frantically than usual to find a few more ponies before they disappear!
 
Ok - I was discusing this with my friends last night and they raised a good point - If second hand stores cants sell the items - how can normal stores sell this kind of stuff new? things in the stores dont tend to be too old - and some people donate unused toys! so how does this work, they should ban making toys if its thats bad!

This really makes no sence to me! LMK if i have the wrong end of the stick here - i just dont see how it makes sence.....
 
Well I just bought Sweet Steps and some toys for my daughter at Savers yesterday.
Not sure what that means. I did try to buy a pair of kids boots at Walmart that had some mysterious recall and they wouldn't sell them! It was a good deal too! Very frustrating. :confused:
 
I did try to buy a pair of kids boots at Walmart that had some mysterious recall and they wouldn't sell them! It was a good deal too! Very frustrating. :confused:


That happened to me aslo. I tried to get a Barbie case and there was some kind of recall and Walmart refused to sell the Barbie case.




Ponyfan
 
Last edited:
A nightmare.

For me this really is a nightmare.

I heard of the ban before but didn't think too much of it... Now I see it is already in effect. I can't believe the United States, I am so baffled by one stupid decision after another when it comes to the (re)selling of toys. Most of my ponies are from eBay and I still need 75-80 to complete my G1 collection. If we can't buy them any more on eBay I am very, very frustrated. Not to mention I have tons of doubles I'd like to sell and, I am very sorry, I prefer selling them on eBay for so many reasons.

First the Bratz ban, now a ban on reselling of toys.


Did we by any chance offend the toy collection Gods? õ___Õ

Sigh! /headache


EDIT:

re:US government

And what about our environment, huh? Last time I checked, the Bush government refused to sign the Kyoto Treaty because they feared for their economy. Uhm, okay. So now let's just throw all good-condition secondhand stuff away? Hasn't that been a huge problem in the USA for years? Where in the world are they going to leave their junk within 5 or 10 years? And what about the families that can't AFFORD new clothes and toys and NEED those thrift shops? Does the US government think Barack Obama will come to people's doors and give them a few dollars out of his own pockets to live from? In other words, you'd think they'd start recycling their junk. Besides, apart from all the environmental and economical issues. People really need to teach their kids not to EAT their toys or SUCK on their toys all day long. WHY are people so unbelievably lazy? And don't even get me started on the US food industries and how that affects the health of the American people. Those figures are just laughable if you compare the amount of cardiovascular diseases that stem from bad eating habits. Sorry if I am confrontational, but stupid political decisions irritate the heck out of me. I could see McDonalds taxes, but a ban on reselling toys? Sorry. This is pointless. Kudos to those that like to think for themselves.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
People really need to teach their kids not to EAT their toys or SUCK on their toys all day long. WHY are people so unbelievably lazy?

It sounds like you don't have any kids lol...If you do, then I'm sorry if I offend...

Either you don't have children and you don't understand...or you must be the best parent in the world for not letting your kids chew on their toys or suck on their toys. For example..some babies like to teeth on certain things (pickiness). Calling it lazy to let them do so is well...uncalled for. It's hard to explain to someone that doesn't have kids but if you do have them then you should be more understanding.
 
As annoying, frustrating (and highly wastefull!) as it sounds, we have to remember they are doing it for our own good. Or more specifically the good of the children.
:-(


Ummm...no. Sorry. This is NOT "for our own good." As someone else mentioned, there are plenty of harmful things readily available with a warning label. With all the things that have been banned in recent years that many of us grew up with, it's AMAZING any of us are still alive and perfectly healthy. If these things were/are so harmful, those of us in our mid-20's to mid-30's shouldn't be in any form of good health.

Again, as someone else mentioned, we are adults and can make our own decisions about how we spend our money and what kinds of things we purchase for our children.

Think of how much money goes into the economy by purchasing children's items - clothing especially. Kids grow FAST. Most of my daughter's baby clothes look brand new. By purchasing things second hand, money is not going to manufaturer's and/or major retailers.

This is over and unecessary government regulation that - aside from being annoying to us - is going to hurt low income families who can't afford to buy things brand new.
 
Ok - I was discusing this with my friends last night and they raised a good point - If second hand stores cants sell the items - how can normal stores sell this kind of stuff new? things in the stores dont tend to be too old - and some people donate unused toys! so how does this work, they should ban making toys if its thats bad!

This really makes no sence to me! LMK if i have the wrong end of the stick here - i just dont see how it makes sence.....

All new toys are being tested by the toy companies. :)

The thing is, the resellers are held accountable if something they sell harms a child.


This is why some thrift stores are probably pulling their toys, they don't want to be sued when some kid develops autism and the parents blame the toy they bought little Johnny at the thrift store.

The thrift stores near me are continuing to sell toys, though. (Woo!)
 
This whole safety kick we're on is getting totally out of hand. It's getting to the point if we don't keep our kids in a germless, chemical free bubble we'll be charged w/ child abuse or neglect. God forbid they should get a bruise or a scrape, or a cold, or have a one in 100,000 chance of a birth defect. I mean they took away metal toys cuz they were sharp, now plastic toys are poisonous? sometimes you have to take a little risk. dang.
 
went to one of my regular thrift stores today...
same thing....
they threw out a TON of toys. still had some. barbies were everywhere
booo!
 
Ummm...no. Sorry. This is NOT "for our own good." As someone else mentioned, there are plenty of harmful things readily available with a warning label. With all the things that have been banned in recent years that many of us grew up with, it's AMAZING any of us are still alive and perfectly healthy. If these things were/are so harmful, those of us in our mid-20's to mid-30's shouldn't be in any form of good health.

Again, as someone else mentioned, we are adults and can make our own decisions about how we spend our money and what kinds of things we purchase for our children.

Think of how much money goes into the economy by purchasing children's items - clothing especially. Kids grow FAST. Most of my daughter's baby clothes look brand new. By purchasing things second hand, money is not going to manufaturer's and/or major retailers.

This is over and unecessary government regulation that - aside from being annoying to us - is going to hurt low income families who can't afford to buy things brand new.

If they are not doing because of the safety issue then why else are they doing it? To boost the economy by encouraging us to buy new stuff??? No. They are doing it (as stupid as it is) because they believe there was a health risk.

Yes other harmful products like cigarettes are readily available because as adults we should be sensible enough to make proper decisions regarding our health (plus they get nice taxes from them). When children come into the picture the health authorities are more likely to want to step in and take that choice away because...well lets be honest... there are a lot of incompetant/naieve parents out there who still do stupid things like feed infants peanuts and honey etc. While they may not be feeding their child ponies they may be exposing them to some other poor quality toys that are deteriorating with age and thus becoming more of a risk or potential hazard.

Ponies aren't harmful (except to my wallet) but they have to draw the line somewhere so putting a blanket ban on everything makes things easier for them I guess.

No offense, but that's easy for you to say since you won't be affected by it.

LOL! You've got to be kidding right?! More then 90% of what my children wear is 2nd hand and I'm a big fan of ebay. Obviously as a pony collector of course I will be affected too.

I think overall it is a bad idea (especially for low income families like us, and businesses and the environment) but I believe their original intent was good. They were trying to protect children from something that is potentially harmful, even if that potential was minimal.

I would be happy if they would just bring the ban on items not yet manufactured that exceed the levels. Let's hope they make some sensible changes.:dog_dance:
 
It sounds like you don't have any kids lol...If you do, then I'm sorry if I offend...

Either you don't have children and you don't understand...or you must be the best parent in the world for not letting your kids chew on their toys or suck on their toys. For example..some babies like to teeth on certain things (pickiness). Calling it lazy to let them do so is well...uncalled for. It's hard to explain to someone that doesn't have kids but if you do have them then you should be more understanding.

actually if you allow your child to chew/suck on something they shouldn't then yes you're lazy. They make baby teething rings for a reason. You're the adult you're supposed to make the decisions, not your kids, not the government.
 
Please don't call parents lazy for letting their children suck on their toys. My little boy is about 4 months old and is starting to learn how to play with his toys a little. He has one of those plastic keyrings that he likes to try to get in his mouth. It isn't specifically designed for teething, but I don't see anything wrong with that. As long as parents are making sure that their children aren't trying to put something they can choke on or obvious things that shouldn't go in their mouths, then it's fine for them to gum their toys. Come on, teenagers chew on pens and pencils while sitting bored in class or doing their homework! Y'all really shouldn't be so quick to deem a parent 'lazy' just because they're children do what is natural for them to do.
 
we're talking about this on the arena, too.

here


my discussion has more to do with how to comply with the law... as some of you know, i make and sell children's items. so this law affects me in a completely different way.

i have been heavily involved in letter writing to congress, representatives, media and other outlets for the last couple months. we pulled together thousands of home based businesses and finally got our message out loud enough that people took notice.

we were granted a stay of enforcement and a year postponement for the testing. we were also given exemptions for most, not all textiles, natural materials and a few other items. read th exemption list here


lead limits are important, and if the law was written in a way to punish for that, and only that, and phthalates, too... i suppose, then it'd be fine. but the way it's written, ALL UNTESTED merchandise is hazardous waste.

books, motorcycles, clothing, toys, cribs, EVERYTHING intended for children under 12.

EVERY THING.



before the stay was put into place, and exemptions for certain materials, we were looking at a much more serious issue, but people pulled together, big time.

if things had not changed, it would be illegal for you to GIVE your sister your baby's old crib, without testing it. otherwise, you'd have to dispose of it. understand, the law is not logically written... it doesn't exactly DO what it was meant to do. instead, it created literally billions of tons of waste, both new and used.

it would be illegal for a library to allow children under 12 into the library without first testing EVERY BOOK, intended for children. as it stands, no book published before 1985 may be passed to or sold to a child, without it first being tested. and that's the law, RIGHT NOW. all books published before 1985, are banned, until proven innocent.

resale stores were not exempted, at first. now, they don't have to test, but they have to tread VERY carefully.




this law is a knee-jerk reaction to cheap manufacturing in china... india, and other countries that either have no laws or ignore their laws. china has a strict lead standard, but they don't enforce it.

countries like germany and the UK, who have very strict standards have started to pull their items from our imports... we're losing american made, and other quality items because of this law. instead of doing what it intended, which was control poor quality imports [99 cent toys, etc] it's punishing quality items.

if we didn't get the stay, my monkeys, which are non-toxic and quality items would no longer be available for children. the testing was just too much... and passing the cost to test them, to you, for an item i already know is lead and phthalate free, because of the nature of textile production, would mean $2000+ monkeys.



the law is over reaching, and over regulating.

bottom line.


the one good thing it does do, is makes it a federal crime, as well as civil... to sell items with high lead content. it was civil before. it makes it illegal to resell recalled items, and it makes companies televise and publish recalls more predominately.

if you'd like to take action, write to your state reps, your state attorney general, congress [namely waxman] and even the president, tho i suspect he can't do much. bush opposed the bill, but it was veto proof... so he had no say in it's passing. it was overwhelmingly voted in.

there's an amendment in the works, H.R. 968... write your congressmen and reps and tell them you support it... it's logical, and it doesn't decrease safety... we're not trying to be exempted from the lead limits, we just want fair testing.

The House Committee of Energy and Commerce




:)


i'm not on this site much, but, if you're on the arena, feel free to post any questions you have. i check that thread every other day... i've lived and breathed this law for months now.
 
Last edited:
If they are not doing because of the safety issue then why else are they doing it? To boost the economy by encouraging us to buy new stuff??? No. They are doing it (as stupid as it is) because they believe there was a health risk.

Yes other harmful products like cigarettes are readily available because as adults we should be sensible enough to make proper decisions regarding our health (plus they get nice taxes from them). When children come into the picture the health authorities are more likely to want to step in and take that choice away because...well lets be honest... there are a lot of incompetant/naieve parents out there who still do stupid things like feed infants peanuts and honey etc. While they may not be feeding their child ponies they may be exposing them to some other poor quality toys that are deteriorating with age and thus becoming more of a risk or potential hazard.

Ponies aren't harmful (except to my wallet) but they have to draw the line somewhere so putting a blanket ban on everything makes things easier for them I guess.



LOL! You've got to be kidding right?! More then 90% of what my children wear is 2nd hand and I'm a big fan of ebay. Obviously as a pony collector of course I will be affected too.

I think overall it is a bad idea (especially for low income families like us, and businesses and the environment) but I believe their original intent was good. They were trying to protect children from something that is potentially harmful, even if that potential was minimal.

I would be happy if they would just bring the ban on items not yet manufactured that exceed the levels. Let's hope they make some sensible changes.:dog_dance:

The reason I said that is because you are in Australia.. and this is a U.S. law.
 
actually if you allow your child to chew/suck on something they shouldn't then yes you're lazy. They make baby teething rings for a reason. You're the adult you're supposed to make the decisions, not your kids, not the government.

Ok you've stooped low enough to call me lazy (and possibly others) and yet you don't know me (or us)? lol Makes me laugh! I didn't mention what toys my kids chewed on earlier but let me point out that I was talking about infant toys (teething rings, soothies etc). My point that I was making (my fault I wasn't clear about this) is that we don't know how much lead or other chemicals are in the teething rings that could be dangerous.
 
If they are not doing because of the safety issue then why else are they doing it? To boost the economy by encouraging us to buy new stuff??? No. They are doing it (as stupid as it is) because they believe there was a health risk.


No offense, you are in Australia. Perhaps the Austrailian government truly makes laws because the are looking out for the publics best interest. The US government does not always. If a group has enough money and/or makes enough noise (usually scare tactics), laws will be made to pacify that group. Yes, it is ENTIRELY possible that this has something to do with boosting the economy - or benefitting certain manufacturers/large retailers.

I hate to sound all "conspiracy theory" here, and I don't mean to start any kind of flame war, but I have worked in several industries where the government has over-regulated and gotten involved where they have no real reason to under the guise of what is best for us.

This law was NOT well thought out and affects things too generally. The US has a bad habit of letting the government (local as well as federal) behave as a nanny. The things I could tell you about California legislation that gets seriously considered! It's insanity.
 
Back
Top