Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
Who's up for a good old fashioned book burning?
There's been a lot of contention online about the CPSIA. Now, second-hand stores have actually begin discarding and destroying all of their children's books from before 1985 (along with other children's products like toys and clothes). After a month of this law being active, there are few children's items in any of the thrift stores I visit. Now, I don't have kids...but for those that do, this could be a huge blow.
I certainly hope all those books we donated to Mr. MacRoss's school will be spared this fate. I know for a fact some of the books in my boxes were pre-1985 publications. A statement from the ALA has made it clear that they consider libraries to be included under this law.
Supposedly, this law makes it illegal not only to sell said books, but to give them away as well. No more family hand-me-down books from before I was born. I find it ironic that the baby book my parents kept when I was born is now considered unsafe for children. I don't suppose the congress has thought about the ramifications of taking away even more resources for children to learn to love reading? Our country is illiterate enough as it is.
I certainly hope all those books we donated to Mr. MacRoss's school will be spared this fate. I know for a fact some of the books in my boxes were pre-1985 publications. A statement from the ALA has made it clear that they consider libraries to be included under this law.
Supposedly, this law makes it illegal not only to sell said books, but to give them away as well. No more family hand-me-down books from before I was born. I find it ironic that the baby book my parents kept when I was born is now considered unsafe for children. I don't suppose the congress has thought about the ramifications of taking away even more resources for children to learn to love reading? Our country is illiterate enough as it is.
Comments
This is really horrible. Second Hand shops have recently been limited not only in being able to carry children's items (like clothed and books - regardless of how old/new they are), furniture, certain kinds of clothes, certain electronics, etc.
I know my Mom relied on thrift stores when I was young. If it weren't for garage sales, thrift stores, and lay-aways - our house would have been empty. It is a shame that these goods are being wasted rather then reaching families that would find good use in the items and limiting an industry that not only provides jobs, but also has entire charities around them (like Goodwill and ABVI).
Is this going to create some weird black market?
I'll get writing to my MP (Minister of Parliament).
@Mrs Macross:"She's selling used books to children!! Get her!"
It's going to be so damn hard for them to enforce the giving away part though. Where are the records? How do they prosecute? It will rarely happen. I suspect that people are going to ignore the law and everyone will be branded criminals. Heck, we're probably already all criminals. It's impossible for any one person to know the full extent of the law in the US.
@Omnutia: LOL. We've all got to do our part to be fine upstanding citizens! I can see the lynch mobs forming now...
Baccano meets Library Wars
@Mrs Macross: "Concerned" parents.
NOM NOM NOM!
Oh yeah, and those blocky teether books that are designed to be chewed on anyway? You're better off buying those new for a dozen reasons, so it's not really an issue for those.
Are there any petitions or groups about this issue that I can take part in?
Technically, anyone buying these items as collectibles can still buy them, but you have to find a place willing to sell them as a collectible. I wrote all about how the government can try all it likes to protect our kids...until parents have the common sense to do it themselves, the government will always fail (short of taking away the kids). What happens the first time Mommy gives her kid a non-child item to chew on?
I linked a few articles in my blog post(rant) on the subject. I think one or two of these pages had links to groups, but I haven't checked them out yet. I have already been doing what I can politically since this came up on Etsy.
My guess, and this is just a guess here, is that a book, even one pre-1985, contains far less lead than a toy from China these days.
I'm all for the government making sensible health regulations where none existed before. For example, I fully support funding studies to determine the safe levels of uranium that can contaminate dog food, so that we can force pet food manufacturers to actually care about what goes into their product.
However, this is just some draconian law. I want to see studies on the levels of lead and other toxins in pre-1985 children's books. I want to see the information used to justify this law. If the information doesn't exist, the law shouldn't either.
On the subject of lead, (which still is a major problem) if the groups that seek to ban every toy with lead genuienly care about lead poisoning in children, then they would focus their efforts to update lower-income housing and clean up contaminated soil.
The retroactive part has more to do, I think, with the fact that books tend to stick around for a while.
I'm not saying I agree with the law at all; I'm just dissecting it and trying to figure out the reasoning. In other words, how do we make this useful instead of knee-jerk and overreaching?
See it here.
That's definitely the reason they want this enforced (read old how-to books sometime; you'll find that they are dangerous as HELL), but I've always thought that kids need a longer leash. The government doesn't exist to play mommy-daddy to the unwashed masses' unguided children.