New law in February. Can't sell used children's clothes anymore? What is the reason for this?

by **adusa37** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:32 am

All states ... consumer protection agency, federal government.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-thrift2-2009jan02,0,2083247.story

by **kienan** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:35 am

Oh geez, what will they come up with next??

by **golding** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:43 am

Wow that is silly! So for those who donate clothes to goodwill, unless you count the donation for your taxes: Give your items through a local freecycle group so that you know they will be used and not thrown into a landfill because of this ridiculous testing. There are people who depend on clothes being available from goodwill and consignment shops and charities, this is not only going to drive costs up but make a limited amount of clothing even more limited.

The reason, they say, is because of lead poisoning. Which is ridiculous! The law went through congress way too quickly and needs more scrutiny. Have they once again forgotten about the "little man" and those in poverty?

by **nicolas** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:51 am

I think it's completely insane.
But the *reason*, if you read the entire article, is to protect our children from lead poisoning and phthalates (whatever those are, I'll have to look it up). I think it's a good reason, but they should have thought about all the small businesses which will be forced to close. You think they could have made some provision, or government assistance to pay at least part of that $50,000 it costs to get the testing done.

by **ardwyad** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:53 am

Yet another example of how liberals mess everything up. They say that they are for the poor but then they pass laws like this that only hurts EVERYONE, especially the poor! As far as the lead goes, I think that people are blowing this way out of proportion. When I grew up, everything contained lead and you don't see people of my generation or older suffering from side effects. I think moderation and careful scrutiny need to take place before creating a blanket law that only hurts people.

by **vruyk** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:57 am

Yet another example of how liberals mess everything up. They say that they are for the poor but then they pass laws like this that only hurts EVERYONE, especially the poor! As far as the lead goes, I think that people are blowing this way out of proportion. When I grew up, everything contained lead and you don't see people of my generation or older suffering from side effects. I think moderation and careful scrutiny need to take place before creating a blanket law that only hurts people.

Goodwill and like stores can reject things on the basis of recall information - I've been in at least one store that had recall info posted and wouldn't accept certain things based on this.

Just another politically correct environmentalist law that will cost even MORE jobs and money to *someone* down the line. ... how unfortunate. The panic and alarmism is getting out of control.

It's not just places like Goodwill, but consignment stores, too - those places will probably go under, too. Let's see how else we can make the economy tank even further??

by **chen12** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:01 pm

MRSA is running amok amongst the school age population. This is a strain of staph that is resistant to known antibiotics and is killing people. NOT a good idea to buy used clothing, even if you wash and dry it at the hottest setting, there is a chance the bacteria can survive........certain strains of this staph are now surviving high pressure/heat sterilization at hospitals.

by **dureau** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:04 pm

This is an example of "When Well Intentioned Goes Wrong". What are they going to come up with next? I don't know about you, but I buy my daughter clothes from Goodwill, Salvation Army, Volunteers of America, etc. all the time! Clothing is expensive and at the rate she grows, there's no way I'm getting my $25 worth out of a pair of jeans for her (seriously why should I pay the same amount for her jeans that I pay for mine and her's use HALF or less clothe?!). And shoes! Holy cow, these places are AWESOME for shoes (ones she'll wear w/ socks of course....I have to draw the line there).

by **spengler** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:09 pm

Welcome to "Mommy State". Carrying my 8 lb. dog in a closed bag, I was ordered out of a Post Office the other day by a cop. I told him, "Pretty soon they'll have you guys sitting outside public toilets, to ring a bell if we don't wash our hands."

Trivial, persnickety, bloody-minded, nosy -- whatever you want to call it. It's the preening, self-aggrandizing nonsense of "Political Correctness" -- and a damned pain in the rear. The maternal instinct gone to seed, and sadly characteristic (along with epidemic Disney branding) in our Western -- and especially American -- culture of a decadent and fear-ridden society that has sought refuge in playing the violin while Rome burns. Ditto blaming it (astonishingly) on "The Liberals".

by **ailwyn** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:12 pm

I think this is completely stupid!!! Both my husband and I are in college and I am 36 weeks pregnant and most of my daughters clothes have been bought from places like Goodwill or Kid to Kid... It seems silly for us to buy her all brandnew clothes when shes only going to wear them for 3 months at max... If we start having to buy all new clothes for her it is going to strap us even more financially... and what about places like Ebay?! are they going to say you can't sell childrens clothes on ebay.... or what about local garage sales... how are they going to regulate this where it will be fair?!?!

Edit::: So I'm wondering how they are going to define the definition of "selling" as well... places like Goodwill or Savlation army could have a "suggested donate price" listed on the item... would that tech be illegal?!?! They aren't selling the item and therefore it shouldn't have to be tested and could be sold

Advertisments:

Sponsor Links: