<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Crafting community could be hurt by toy safety law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law</link>
	<description>News, opinions and reviews on all things Columbus, Ohio.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 05:01:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anne</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-107921</link>
		<dc:creator>Anne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2011 21:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-107921</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Another update on this:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular; font-size: x-small;&quot;&gt;
&lt;h2&gt;CPSC Launches Registry for Small Batch Children’s Product Manufacturers&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, CPSC is launching an easy-to-use registry for small batch manufacturers, which can be found at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.saferproducts.gov/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;www.SaferProducts.gov&lt;/a&gt;.   Congress directed CPSC to establish this registry for small batch  manufacturers in Public Law 112-28, which was signed into law by  President Obama on August 12, 2011.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Small batch manufacturers, defined as those who earned $1 million or  less in total gross revenues from sales of consumer products in 2011,  and who produced in total no more than 7,500 units of at least one  consumer product in 2011 can register for calendar year 2012 at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.saferproducts.gov/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;www.SaferProducts.gov&lt;/a&gt;.   Qualifying small batch manufacturers are not required to third party  test for compliance with certain children’s product safety rules during  2012 for products which they produced no more than 7,500 units of in the  previous calendar year.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This new registry does not exempt small batch manufacturers from  ensuring that their products comply with these mandatory standards.   Small batch manufacturers must still provide a certificate of  conformity, in which the manufacturers certify in writing that their  products comply with the applicable regulations. However, except where  required by law, the certificate does not have to be based on third  party testing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Effective December 31, 2011, the stays of enforcement on third-party  testing and certification for limits on total lead content for  children’s products, the ban on certain phthalates for children’s toys  and child care articles, and the mandatory toy standard (ASTM F963) will  end.  CPSC launched an education and outreach effort to ensure  widespread awareness of the new federal requirements and has also  provided assistance and guidance to small batch manufacturers to help  them understand these new requirements.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For additional information on the Small Batch Manufacturers Registry and small batch guidance materials, please see &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cpsc.gov/smallbatch&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;www.cpsc.gov/smallbatch&lt;/a&gt;.  You may also contact our small business ombudsman Neal Cohen at &lt;a href=&quot;mailto:ncohen@cpsc.gov&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ncohen@cpsc.gov&lt;/a&gt; or through &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cpsc.gov/sbo&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;www.cpsc.gov/sbo&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another update on this:</p>
<p><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular; font-size: x-small;"></p>
<h2>CPSC Launches Registry for Small Batch Children’s Product Manufacturers</h2>
<p>WASHINGTON, D.C. &#8211; Today, CPSC is launching an easy-to-use registry for small batch manufacturers, which can be found at <a href="http://www.saferproducts.gov/" rel="nofollow">http://www.SaferProducts.gov</a>.   Congress directed CPSC to establish this registry for small batch  manufacturers in Public Law 112-28, which was signed into law by  President Obama on August 12, 2011.</p>
<p>Small batch manufacturers, defined as those who earned $1 million or  less in total gross revenues from sales of consumer products in 2011,  and who produced in total no more than 7,500 units of at least one  consumer product in 2011 can register for calendar year 2012 at <a href="http://www.saferproducts.gov/" rel="nofollow">http://www.SaferProducts.gov</a>.   Qualifying small batch manufacturers are not required to third party  test for compliance with certain children’s product safety rules during  2012 for products which they produced no more than 7,500 units of in the  previous calendar year.</p>
<p>This new registry does not exempt small batch manufacturers from  ensuring that their products comply with these mandatory standards.   Small batch manufacturers must still provide a certificate of  conformity, in which the manufacturers certify in writing that their  products comply with the applicable regulations. However, except where  required by law, the certificate does not have to be based on third  party testing.</p>
<p>Effective December 31, 2011, the stays of enforcement on third-party  testing and certification for limits on total lead content for  children’s products, the ban on certain phthalates for children’s toys  and child care articles, and the mandatory toy standard (ASTM F963) will  end.  CPSC launched an education and outreach effort to ensure  widespread awareness of the new federal requirements and has also  provided assistance and guidance to small batch manufacturers to help  them understand these new requirements.</p>
<p>For additional information on the Small Batch Manufacturers Registry and small batch guidance materials, please see <a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/smallbatch" rel="nofollow">http://www.cpsc.gov/smallbatch</a>.  You may also contact our small business ombudsman Neal Cohen at <a href="mailto:ncohen@cpsc.gov" rel="nofollow">ncohen@cpsc.gov</a> or through <a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/sbo" rel="nofollow">http://www.cpsc.gov/sbo</a></p>
<p></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: desecration</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-78161</link>
		<dc:creator>desecration</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:57:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-78161</guid>
		<description>This commission voted for a stay regarding some areas of this law for a year.



&lt;strong&gt;CPSC Grants One Year Stay of Testing and Certification Requirements for Certain Products&lt;/strong&gt;
Washington, D.C. – The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission voted unanimously (2-0) to issue a one year stay of enforcement for certain testing and certification requirements for manufacturers and importers of regulated products, including products intended for children 12 years old and younger. These requirements are part of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), which added certification and testing requirements for all products subject to CPSC standards or bans.
Significant to makers of childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s products, the vote by the Commission provides limited relief from the testing and certification requirements which go into effect on February 10, 2009 for new total lead content limits (600 ppm), phthalates limits for certain products (1000 ppm), and mandatory toy standards, among other things. Manufacturers and importers – large and small – of childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s products will not need to test or certify to these new requirements, but will need to meet the lead and phthalates limits, mandatory toy standards and other requirements.
The decision by the Commission gives the staff more time to finalize four proposed rules which could relieve certain materials and products from lead testing and to issue more guidance on when testing is required and how it is to be conducted.
The stay will remain in effect until February 10, 2010, at which time a Commission vote will be taken to terminate the stay.
The stay does not apply to:


Four requirements for third-party testing and certification of certain childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s products subject to:


The ban on lead in paint and other surface coatings effective for products made after December 21, 2008;


The standards for full-size and non full-size cribs and pacifiers effective for products made after January 20, 2009;


The ban on small parts effective for products made after February 15, 2009; and


The limits on lead content of metal components of childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s jewelry effective for products made after March 23, 2009.




Certification requirements applicable to ATVÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s manufactured after April 13, 2009.


Pre-CPSIA testing and certification requirements, including for: automatic residential garage door openers, bike helmets, candles with metal core wicks, lawnmowers, lighters, mattresses, and swimming pool slides; and


Pool drain cover requirements of the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool &amp; Spa Safety Act.


The stay of enforcement provides some temporary, limited relief to the crafters, childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s garment manufacturers and toy makers who had been subject to the testing and certification required under the CPSIA. These businesses will not need to issue certificates based on testing of their products until additional decisions are issued by the Commission. However, all businesses, including, but not limited to, handmade toy and apparel makers, crafters and home-based small businesses, must still be sure that their products conform to all safety standards and similar requirements, including the lead and phthalates provisions of the CPSIA.
Handmade garment makers are cautioned to know whether the zippers, buttons and other fasteners they are using contain lead. Likewise, handmade toy manufacturers need to know whether their products, if using plastic or soft flexible vinyl, contain phthalates.
The stay of enforcement on testing and certification does not address thrift and second hand stores and small retailers because they are not required to test and certify products under the CPSIA. The products they sell, including those in inventory on February 10, 2009, must not contain more than 600 ppm lead in any accessible part. The Commission is aware that it is difficult to know whether a product meets the lead standard without testing and has issued guidance for these companies that can be found on our Web site.
The Commission trusts that State Attorneys General will respect the Commission&#039;s judgment that it is necessary to stay certain testing and certification requirements and will focus their own enforcement efforts on other provisions of the law, e.g. the sale of recalled products.
Please visit the CPSC Web site at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/cpsia.html&quot;&gt;www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/cpsia.html&lt;/a&gt; for more information on all of the efforts being made to successfully implement the CPSIA.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This commission voted for a stay regarding some areas of this law for a year.</p>
<p><strong>CPSC Grants One Year Stay of Testing and Certification Requirements for Certain Products</strong><br />
Washington, D.C. – The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission voted unanimously (2-0) to issue a one year stay of enforcement for certain testing and certification requirements for manufacturers and importers of regulated products, including products intended for children 12 years old and younger. These requirements are part of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), which added certification and testing requirements for all products subject to CPSC standards or bans.<br />
Significant to makers of childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s products, the vote by the Commission provides limited relief from the testing and certification requirements which go into effect on February 10, 2009 for new total lead content limits (600 ppm), phthalates limits for certain products (1000 ppm), and mandatory toy standards, among other things. Manufacturers and importers – large and small – of childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s products will not need to test or certify to these new requirements, but will need to meet the lead and phthalates limits, mandatory toy standards and other requirements.<br />
The decision by the Commission gives the staff more time to finalize four proposed rules which could relieve certain materials and products from lead testing and to issue more guidance on when testing is required and how it is to be conducted.<br />
The stay will remain in effect until February 10, 2010, at which time a Commission vote will be taken to terminate the stay.<br />
The stay does not apply to:</p>
<p>Four requirements for third-party testing and certification of certain childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s products subject to:</p>
<p>The ban on lead in paint and other surface coatings effective for products made after December 21, 2008;</p>
<p>The standards for full-size and non full-size cribs and pacifiers effective for products made after January 20, 2009;</p>
<p>The ban on small parts effective for products made after February 15, 2009; and</p>
<p>The limits on lead content of metal components of childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s jewelry effective for products made after March 23, 2009.</p>
<p>Certification requirements applicable to ATVÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s manufactured after April 13, 2009.</p>
<p>Pre-CPSIA testing and certification requirements, including for: automatic residential garage door openers, bike helmets, candles with metal core wicks, lawnmowers, lighters, mattresses, and swimming pool slides; and</p>
<p>Pool drain cover requirements of the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool &amp; Spa Safety Act.</p>
<p>The stay of enforcement provides some temporary, limited relief to the crafters, childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s garment manufacturers and toy makers who had been subject to the testing and certification required under the CPSIA. These businesses will not need to issue certificates based on testing of their products until additional decisions are issued by the Commission. However, all businesses, including, but not limited to, handmade toy and apparel makers, crafters and home-based small businesses, must still be sure that their products conform to all safety standards and similar requirements, including the lead and phthalates provisions of the CPSIA.<br />
Handmade garment makers are cautioned to know whether the zippers, buttons and other fasteners they are using contain lead. Likewise, handmade toy manufacturers need to know whether their products, if using plastic or soft flexible vinyl, contain phthalates.<br />
The stay of enforcement on testing and certification does not address thrift and second hand stores and small retailers because they are not required to test and certify products under the CPSIA. The products they sell, including those in inventory on February 10, 2009, must not contain more than 600 ppm lead in any accessible part. The Commission is aware that it is difficult to know whether a product meets the lead standard without testing and has issued guidance for these companies that can be found on our Web site.<br />
The Commission trusts that State Attorneys General will respect the Commission&#8217;s judgment that it is necessary to stay certain testing and certification requirements and will focus their own enforcement efforts on other provisions of the law, e.g. the sale of recalled products.<br />
Please visit the CPSC Web site at <a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/cpsia.html">http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/cpsia.html</a> for more information on all of the efforts being made to successfully implement the CPSIA.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LauraA</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77082</link>
		<dc:creator>LauraA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 03:24:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77082</guid>
		<description>&quot;I had to get some plastic deposit bags that IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve ordered for years tested recently. Bags! For a bank!! If they hire someone that doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t know to NOT eat or put a plastic bag over their head then theyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve got bigger issues than what IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m testing for.&quot;

i work for said bank and we had a guy that came to work with his shoes on the wrong feet. not once, but twice. so yeah, you do need to get that tested.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I had to get some plastic deposit bags that IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve ordered for years tested recently. Bags! For a bank!! If they hire someone that doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t know to NOT eat or put a plastic bag over their head then theyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve got bigger issues than what IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m testing for.&#8221;</p>
<p>i work for said bank and we had a guy that came to work with his shoes on the wrong feet. not once, but twice. so yeah, you do need to get that tested.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nbcsquire</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77070</link>
		<dc:creator>nbcsquire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77070</guid>
		<description>NBC 4 did a story last week after I saw the story floating around on Facebook and wanted to see what was truth and what was fiction.  To my horror, most everything was true.  Imagine getting put in handcuffs or fined b/c you were selling baby merchandise at a yard sale that wasn&#039;t lead tested.  The day after we did the story we received a clarification from the Consumer Product Safety Commission.  This clarification came after a Central Ohioan, Ann Bush-Cassady, launched an effort to let the CPSC know how this would affect people.  I thought it was cool that Ann used Facebook to gather support and the CPSC listened to what she had to say and then clarified their rules.  With that said, it&#039;s still a very poorly written law that could put the &quot;little guy&quot; at risk for legal trouble.

&lt;blockquote&gt;
By Denise Yost
Managing Editor, nbc4i.com
Published: January 9, 2009

COLUMBUS, Ohio—Toy and clothing manufacturers face tough penalties next month if lead is found in any of their products. 

A new law meant to protect consumers also created a lot of fear and confusion about toys found in small resale and consignment stores, NBC 4‘s Candice Lee reported. 

Ann Bush-Cassady has been in the resale-consignment business for more than 18 years. Selling gently used toys makes up 20 to 25 percent of her sales.

Ã¢â‚¬Å“We sell a lot of toys. We sell them inexpensively. People like to pick them up for their children on the way out the door,Ã¢â‚¬Å“ she said.

Her lucrative business almost hit a road block, thanks to language in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, which goes into effect Feb. 10.

At first glance, the act would have required resale and consignment shops to test every toy and stitch of clothing for lead.

Ã¢â‚¬Å“Depending on the type of test they ran, it was going to be $70 and up per piece,Ã¢â‚¬Å“ she said. 

But the Consumer Product Safety Commission clarified the law Friday:

It is illegal to sell any childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s product containing more than 600 parts per million of lead. 

Items with more than .1 percent of phthalates are banned. 

Manufacturers must certify that their goods meet safety guidelines. 

The law does not require resellers to test childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s products in inventory for compliance; however stores must do their research. If they resell such products, they face civil and/or criminal penalties.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NBC 4 did a story last week after I saw the story floating around on Facebook and wanted to see what was truth and what was fiction.  To my horror, most everything was true.  Imagine getting put in handcuffs or fined b/c you were selling baby merchandise at a yard sale that wasn&#8217;t lead tested.  The day after we did the story we received a clarification from the Consumer Product Safety Commission.  This clarification came after a Central Ohioan, Ann Bush-Cassady, launched an effort to let the CPSC know how this would affect people.  I thought it was cool that Ann used Facebook to gather support and the CPSC listened to what she had to say and then clarified their rules.  With that said, it&#8217;s still a very poorly written law that could put the &#8220;little guy&#8221; at risk for legal trouble.</p>
<blockquote><p>
By Denise Yost<br />
Managing Editor, nbc4i.com<br />
Published: January 9, 2009</p>
<p>COLUMBUS, Ohio—Toy and clothing manufacturers face tough penalties next month if lead is found in any of their products. </p>
<p>A new law meant to protect consumers also created a lot of fear and confusion about toys found in small resale and consignment stores, NBC 4‘s Candice Lee reported. </p>
<p>Ann Bush-Cassady has been in the resale-consignment business for more than 18 years. Selling gently used toys makes up 20 to 25 percent of her sales.</p>
<p>Ã¢â‚¬Å“We sell a lot of toys. We sell them inexpensively. People like to pick them up for their children on the way out the door,Ã¢â‚¬Å“ she said.</p>
<p>Her lucrative business almost hit a road block, thanks to language in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, which goes into effect Feb. 10.</p>
<p>At first glance, the act would have required resale and consignment shops to test every toy and stitch of clothing for lead.</p>
<p>Ã¢â‚¬Å“Depending on the type of test they ran, it was going to be $70 and up per piece,Ã¢â‚¬Å“ she said. </p>
<p>But the Consumer Product Safety Commission clarified the law Friday:</p>
<p>It is illegal to sell any childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s product containing more than 600 parts per million of lead. </p>
<p>Items with more than .1 percent of phthalates are banned. </p>
<p>Manufacturers must certify that their goods meet safety guidelines. </p>
<p>The law does not require resellers to test childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s products in inventory for compliance; however stores must do their research. If they resell such products, they face civil and/or criminal penalties.
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anne</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77064</link>
		<dc:creator>Anne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:01:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77064</guid>
		<description>blammo wrote: How do they define what a Ã¢â‚¬Å“toyÃ¢â‚¬Â is? Just wondering if Nikos &amp; others could sell Ã¢â‚¬Å“collectable sculpturesÃ¢â‚¬Â instead.


USCA 15 Section 2052(a)(2) Children&#039;s product
The term &quot;children&#039;s product&quot; means a consumer product designed or intended for children 12 years of age or younger. In determining whether a consumer product intended for a child 12 years of age or younger, the following factors shall govern
(A) A statement by a manufacturer about the intended use of such product and a label on such product if such statement is reasonable.
(B) Whether the product is represented in its packaging, display, promotion, or advertising as appropriate for use by children 12 years of age or younger.
(C)Whether the product is commonly recognized by consumers as being intended for use by a child 12 years of age or younger.
(D) The Age Determination Guildelines issued by the Commission staff in September 2002, and any successor to such guidelines.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>blammo wrote: How do they define what a Ã¢â‚¬Å“toyÃ¢â‚¬Â is? Just wondering if Nikos &#038; others could sell Ã¢â‚¬Å“collectable sculpturesÃ¢â‚¬Â instead.</p>
<p>USCA 15 Section 2052(a)(2) Children&#8217;s product<br />
The term &#8220;children&#8217;s product&#8221; means a consumer product designed or intended for children 12 years of age or younger. In determining whether a consumer product intended for a child 12 years of age or younger, the following factors shall govern<br />
(A) A statement by a manufacturer about the intended use of such product and a label on such product if such statement is reasonable.<br />
(B) Whether the product is represented in its packaging, display, promotion, or advertising as appropriate for use by children 12 years of age or younger.<br />
(C)Whether the product is commonly recognized by consumers as being intended for use by a child 12 years of age or younger.<br />
(D) The Age Determination Guildelines issued by the Commission staff in September 2002, and any successor to such guidelines.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: somertimeoh</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77063</link>
		<dc:creator>somertimeoh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:50:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77063</guid>
		<description>The Consumer Product Make My Life Hell Act is a complete pain in the ass.  My company is already forcing our suppliers to adhere to these standards.  I had to get some plastic deposit bags that I&#039;ve ordered for years tested recently.  Bags!  For a bank!!  If they hire someone that doesn&#039;t know to NOT eat or put a plastic bag over their head then they&#039;ve got bigger issues than what I&#039;m testing for.  

This follows the same ridiculous logic of the church lady getting in trouble for giving cakes to friends or whatever that story was.  It&#039;s just sad that we&#039;ve legislated ourselves to this point :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Consumer Product Make My Life Hell Act is a complete pain in the ass.  My company is already forcing our suppliers to adhere to these standards.  I had to get some plastic deposit bags that I&#8217;ve ordered for years tested recently.  Bags!  For a bank!!  If they hire someone that doesn&#8217;t know to NOT eat or put a plastic bag over their head then they&#8217;ve got bigger issues than what I&#8217;m testing for.  </p>
<p>This follows the same ridiculous logic of the church lady getting in trouble for giving cakes to friends or whatever that story was.  It&#8217;s just sad that we&#8217;ve legislated ourselves to this point :(</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: little_evil</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77061</link>
		<dc:creator>little_evil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77061</guid>
		<description>I heard a little about this last week.  A woman who works at the tutoring center crochets afghans for charity, and the organization she works with is being forced to put a hold on the distribution of all donated items.  These people are not selling anything...they are donating to the poor and needy, yet they can&#039;t distribute because of this law.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I heard a little about this last week.  A woman who works at the tutoring center crochets afghans for charity, and the organization she works with is being forced to put a hold on the distribution of all donated items.  These people are not selling anything&#8230;they are donating to the poor and needy, yet they can&#8217;t distribute because of this law.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anne</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77060</link>
		<dc:creator>Anne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77060</guid>
		<description>I think this is also part of the problem:
101(b) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN MATERIALS OR PRODUCTS AND
INACCESSIBLE COMPONENT PARTS.—
(1) CERTAIN PRODUCTS OR MATERIALS.—The Commission
may, by regulation, exclude a specific product or material from
the prohibition in subsection (a) if the Commission, after notice
and a hearing, determines on the basis of the best-available,
objective, peer-reviewed, scientific evidence that lead in such
product or material will neither—
(A) result in the absorption of any lead into the human
body, taking into account normal and reasonably foreseeable
use and abuse of such product by a child, including
swallowing, mouthing, breaking, or other childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s activities,
and the aging of the product; nor
(B) have any other adverse impact on public health
or safety.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has not released any such list of specific products or materials that will be excluded, so for now, everyone has to assume this law is going to effect them.

I also read that each component of your product has to be tested, so that if you make a toy with fabric, cotton, buttons, you have to test each one of those.

Personally, I think if the government is not going to put reasonable exclusions on this law, I think they should substantially lower the cost of the lead testing. Or perhaps if your business is small enough, you pay next to nothing for the testing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this is also part of the problem:<br />
101(b) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN MATERIALS OR PRODUCTS AND<br />
INACCESSIBLE COMPONENT PARTS.—<br />
(1) CERTAIN PRODUCTS OR MATERIALS.—The Commission<br />
may, by regulation, exclude a specific product or material from<br />
the prohibition in subsection (a) if the Commission, after notice<br />
and a hearing, determines on the basis of the best-available,<br />
objective, peer-reviewed, scientific evidence that lead in such<br />
product or material will neither—<br />
(A) result in the absorption of any lead into the human<br />
body, taking into account normal and reasonably foreseeable<br />
use and abuse of such product by a child, including<br />
swallowing, mouthing, breaking, or other childrenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s activities,<br />
and the aging of the product; nor<br />
(B) have any other adverse impact on public health<br />
or safety.</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br />
The Commission has not released any such list of specific products or materials that will be excluded, so for now, everyone has to assume this law is going to effect them.</p>
<p>I also read that each component of your product has to be tested, so that if you make a toy with fabric, cotton, buttons, you have to test each one of those.</p>
<p>Personally, I think if the government is not going to put reasonable exclusions on this law, I think they should substantially lower the cost of the lead testing. Or perhaps if your business is small enough, you pay next to nothing for the testing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77057</link>
		<dc:creator>Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:00:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77057</guid>
		<description>More:

http://wjz.com/consumer/toy.makers.costs.2.894585.html

http://www.mgwashington.com/index.php/news/article/mom-and-pop-toymakers-fear-new-testing-regulations/2274/

http://consumerist.com/5117450/new-toy-safety-rule-has-collateral-damage-handmade-toy-manufacturers</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More:</p>
<p><a href="http://wjz.com/consumer/toy.makers.costs.2.894585.html" rel="nofollow">http://wjz.com/consumer/toy.makers.costs.2.894585.html</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.mgwashington.com/index.php/news/article/mom-and-pop-toymakers-fear-new-testing-regulations/2274/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mgwashington.com/index.php/news/article/mom-and-pop-toymakers-fear-new-testing-regulations/2274/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://consumerist.com/5117450/new-toy-safety-rule-has-collateral-damage-handmade-toy-manufacturers" rel="nofollow">http://consumerist.com/5117450/new-toy-safety-rule-has-collateral-damage-handmade-toy-manufacturers</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Coremodels</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77056</link>
		<dc:creator>Coremodels</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:59:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77056</guid>
		<description>I think you&#039;re partially right, but I also think that it means submitting ONE toy of similar components to the rest, not each individual item.  I&#039;ll dig into it later, plus tell gram to make some use of himself and try and give lawyers a more positive light by reviewing it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you&#8217;re partially right, but I also think that it means submitting ONE toy of similar components to the rest, not each individual item.  I&#8217;ll dig into it later, plus tell gram to make some use of himself and try and give lawyers a more positive light by reviewing it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NikosFyodor</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77055</link>
		<dc:creator>NikosFyodor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:58:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77055</guid>
		<description>PS- I just tried to read the law but my eyes started to bleed a little so I stopped.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PS- I just tried to read the law but my eyes started to bleed a little so I stopped.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77054</link>
		<dc:creator>Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:57:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77054</guid>
		<description>I think the SEC. 102. (MANDATORY THIRD PARTY TESTING FOR CERTAIN CHILDRENÃ¢â‚¬â„¢S PRODUCTS) is what&#039;s got most people upset.

I&#039;ve not read all the way through it myself, but it sounds like the additional testing requirements are going to add overhead to small crafters that won&#039;t be able to afford the costs for testing.

Hopefully I&#039;m wrong though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the SEC. 102. (MANDATORY THIRD PARTY TESTING FOR CERTAIN CHILDRENÃ¢â‚¬â„¢S PRODUCTS) is what&#8217;s got most people upset.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve not read all the way through it myself, but it sounds like the additional testing requirements are going to add overhead to small crafters that won&#8217;t be able to afford the costs for testing.</p>
<p>Hopefully I&#8217;m wrong though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NikosFyodor</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77053</link>
		<dc:creator>NikosFyodor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:56:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77053</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know how you define anything as anything anymore, after being introduced to the slippery world of semiotics by Clinton&#039;s questioning of what the definition of &quot;is&quot; is.
I always thought that &quot;toys&quot; were for kids, but apparently a lot of adults use &quot;toys&quot; as well! Is there a crafting community for those too?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know how you define anything as anything anymore, after being introduced to the slippery world of semiotics by Clinton&#8217;s questioning of what the definition of &#8220;is&#8221; is.<br />
I always thought that &#8220;toys&#8221; were for kids, but apparently a lot of adults use &#8220;toys&#8221; as well! Is there a crafting community for those too?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Coremodels</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77052</link>
		<dc:creator>Coremodels</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:50:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77052</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m reading the actual Act now, and I don&#039;t think this is an accurate interpretation.  I&#039;ll read it in more detail in a bit, but here&#039;s a link if you like:
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsia.Pdf</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m reading the actual Act now, and I don&#8217;t think this is an accurate interpretation.  I&#8217;ll read it in more detail in a bit, but here&#8217;s a link if you like:<br />
<a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsia.Pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsia.Pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: blammo</title>
		<link>http://www.columbusunderground.com/crafting-community-could-be-hurt-by-toy-safety-law/comment-page-1#comment-77051</link>
		<dc:creator>blammo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:42:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.columbusunderground.com/?p=5133#comment-77051</guid>
		<description>How do they define what a &quot;toy&quot; is? Just wondering if Nikos &amp; others could sell &quot;collectable sculptures&quot; instead.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How do they define what a &#8220;toy&#8221; is? Just wondering if Nikos &amp; others could sell &#8220;collectable sculptures&#8221; instead.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

