Shopsmith Forums

dusty wrote:I said - "Are any of us considered MANUFACTURERS"?

It seems that we probably are:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manufacture

You must have looked up the spelling of 'us' while in that dictionary. If you 'made' it you 'manufactured' it.[IMHO]

jpg40504 wrote:We have a solution!!!! Make it out of WOOD, but DO NOT test it! But beware if you DO test it and it is 'dangerous' you are liable!

GEEZ What mental dwarf would test anything thus 'exempted'?

Anybody know if MIN-WAX is 'possibly dangerous"???

Wonder if rosewood is exempted?:D

JPG- as an electrical engineer, you are undoubtedly aware of the effect and affects of bureaucratic rules. They actually ruled your work!

For woodworkers, the Federal law and associated rules intended to protect children did the same for all of us that makes stuff for kids. Until yesterday, when the federal bureaucrats finally came up with their fact that products made of wood are exempt from testing for lead. Until that release, ALL children's toys were subject to testing.

Until that release, every product made for a child was subject to the primary rules (including testing).

Although there was no sense to it - their (the bureaucrats) answers to all inquiries reqesting an exemption for home made wood items was answered with a statement like - "There will be no exemptions!"

Yes, it doesn't make sense- it doesn't have to - it is a law! -to which, rules are being formulated. Up to yesterday, they didn't care if trees or the wood that comes from them don't contain lead - The burden of proof was on the maker of the product, not the feds.

I've had much experience dealing with environmental laws and rules. Please believe - a rule does not have to address the "real world" in order to become and enforceable rule. And also believe that such silly rules ARE enforceable, once passed and especially after a case is tried and found in violation. It then becomes case law which is much stronger than just a silly rule.

Is rosewood exempted? According to the release YES! The release includes imported wood. Make sense? It doesn't have to - it's a rule. But rosewood like other woods probably does not contain lead - and that was the point of the release. As of now, all wood is exempt.

There may be future rules to address specific woods, but at present all wood is exempted from testing for lead.

charlese wrote:
Yes, it doesn't make sense- it doesn't have to - it is a law! -to which, rules are being formulated. Up to yesterday, they didn't care if trees or the wood that comes from them don't contain lead - The burden of proof was on the maker of the product, not the feds. . . .

YES That IS the crux(sp?) of the "PROBLEM". Only an Idiot could JUSTIFY a 'regulation' NOT MAKING SENSE!:( I am thankful most of these irrational beings are not out in the 'real' world where they could do some 'real' damage rather than make life miserable for us 'rational folks'.

It is a pity the 'enforcers' are not allowed to engage in ANY thought let alone any rational/logical thinking! We are being regulated by 'automatons'! PITY!

Anyone in favor of abolishing 'big brother'? 1984 is almost here!

I pause now! (Can't guarantee I have STOPPED!)

BTW WHO told you to read my profile????:D

jpg40504 wrote:YES That IS the crux(sp?) of the "PROBLEM". Only an Idiot could JUSTIFY a 'regulation' NOT MAKING SENSE!:( I am thankful most of these irrational beings are not out in the 'real' world where they could do some 'real' damage rather than make life miserable for us 'rational folks'.

BTW WHO told you to read my profile????:D

One of the largest problems when making rules and also enforcing them is the word arbitrary. This word means that some otherwise reasonable and well intentioned people honestly believe the rules to be for the 'better good'. It is when we - in the minority - believe (AND KNOW) some rules to be foolish, that we must try and try some more to get these rules changed before they do harm. This was the case with the call for inspecting all products intended for children. Many letters and calls were successful in this case.

I could tell you of many environmental rules that took years to over-rule because reasonable people could not convince the mood of the day during rule making. Many job losses, business closures ensued.

However this is not the place for such discussions. I will end now - knowing that it is always more productive to participate in trying issues than to ignore them and simply call them stupid. This learned the hard way! I'm also thankful that in our country, we are able to participate in such issues and try very hard to progress.

If we want to discuss this more - let's go to the Community Forum.

Perhaps this has already been posted, but if it has here it is again.

http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/smbus/cpsiasbguide.html

This is Q & A page. Note q #9 and Table B.

First let me write that I am pleased and relieved that the rules have been modified to exempt wood from lead testing. I really enjoy making toys for children, and although I have yet to sell a toy, I have given many away to friends and family.
As a pharmacist, I have worked in an environment for many years which is inundated and controlled by senseless regulation. The regulations, when viewed as an application to the entire medical community seems reasonable, but when applied to an individual location seems ludicrous.
Testing all children's toys for toxins seems noble. I want my grandchildren protected from toxic dolls, stickers, costumes, etc. But we have all seen what happens when the regulations drip and trickle down to the local level.
Hopefully sanity will continue to prevail.
Back to the sawdust.
Gary