Sure, no parent wants to give children hazardous toys, and likely thats why there is so little outrage over this… but its also very likely the shady practice of big business using the legislative tools available to put away competition.

Nothing I am involved with is children related, but this parallels the past in so many other arenas where lobbyists had a field day at the expense of the masses. Its a sad deal all around, and worse, if they end up being successful gaming the tests, or we find out in 10 years the alternative chemistries are 100X more hazardous than what they legislatively replace. There are always unintended consequences….

“If they just applied this to imports which I think SHOULD be stringent, would it still affect you as much?”

I don’t know for sure. The self-inking stamp mounts are all imported. The last brand that I know of that was being manufactured in the U.S. was moved outside the country a couple years ago. And, those are not products primarily intended for use by children, so they would not be subject to testing.

But, parents have ordered them for their children. I know of one customer who ordered a self-inking stamp for their disabled child. He couldn’t sign his name well, but he could rubber stamp and he enjoyed it.

So, if some kids use it, does that mean it would have to be tested? I don’t know. But, if it did have to be tested, I would probably be the one to be responsible for testing, because the manufacturer would not be required to test it because it is not intended primarily for children.

So, that would be a gray area. But, I would think that, in such a case, a disclaimer might be acceptable (i.e., not designed for use by children under the age of 13) because it’s really not a product designed primarily for or intended primarily for children. But, again, I don’t know for sure. And, as the current legislation is written, it’s up to a bureaucrat to decide whether it’s a product for kids and a disclaimer won’t affect that, apparently.

There are “child-safe” ink pads and inks that I carry. But I am a reseller, not a manufacturer on those. So, as I understand it, I would not be responsible for testing it if the manufacturer provides documentation.

The bigger concern is art stamps. The way the legislation is written, it appears to be up to bureaucrats to decide whether something is intended for children or not. So, even if I had a label saying that the stamps were for kids aged 13 or older, if some bureaucrat decides it appeals to younger children, then it’s considered designed for younger children and must be tested.

But, in this case, the art stamps are made in the U.S. and I believe all the parts are made in the U.S. So, if the CPSIA was limited to imports, then I would probably be okay on those.

If they just applied this to imports which I think SHOULD be stringent, would it still affect you as much? I would think then more value would be placed on things made in the U.S. I wouldn’t mind that too much.

Hey…got a little sumthin for ya!

But, yeah, child custody can be really messed up sometimes. And so can child services.