On Mar 20, 8:30 pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:53:08 -0600, with neither quill nor qualm, F.
George McDuffee quickly quoth:

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:34:17 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

And the health hazards/probability of a young child licking a bookbag
soaked with apple cider is what again?

Some times...tempests do form in teapots.
==========
This may be of interest.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Athletic shoe and apparel maker Reebok has
agreed to pay a $1 million fine for importing and distributing
charm bracelets that contained toxic levels of lead and
==resulted in the death of a 4-year-old boy.==

While I'm sorry for the dumb kid, all I can think of is "Crap, there
goes the price of my sneakers again." Reebok Classic nylong
crosstrainers are the mainstay of my footwear today.

for complete article click on
http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...-18-reebok-fin...

Admittedly 1 in 300,000 is pretty good odds, unless it is your
kid that dies. Another factor is that lead exposure has
considerable adverse affects on intelligence, and it does not
take many of the remaining 299,999 bracelets to create a
"learning disability" [special ed] child and/or diminished metal
capacity adults [such as voting Democratic] to incur external [to
the company] costs that far outstrip the 1mm$ fine.

With all the hubbub about lead these days, do you see any of the
supposed victims? Hell, we all grew up munching lead weights on
fishing lines from age, what, 3? Many of us cast our own lead
figurines and sinkers, bullets, etc. We all survived a nearly
continuous contact with lead for years, but how many of us are
braindead? (Ah, ah, ah, don't go there!) I'm not buying the scare.

If Reebok had to have a bracelet for product promotion, it would
have been at most only a few additional dollars [if any] for a
tin, aluminum, or inert/safe plastic heart pendant, although this
would still seem to fall under the small parts choking hazard
prohibition.

Oh, come on, George. They bought these things as cheap trifles and had
no expectation that they would be harmful. Adding several dollars to
each of a million pairs of shoes is a very expensive proposition.
Their $25,000 (WAG) marketing gimmick would have cost and extra
several million dollars. That's not realistic.

Why is it that our country finds the need to mandate that nothing can
be sold which could possibly harm the stupidest of us -while- they're
being ignored by their parents?

Gimme a freakin' break... Spencer had it right.

--
Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives.
-- A. Sachs

Would you be having the same opinion if the child that died was yours?

Or the child who was permanently mentally crippled was your son or
daughter/

It seems like you need a lesson in life taught.

TMT