Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AdmundfortGeographer" data-source="post: 4652827" data-attributes="member: 4682">Testing for lead is not inexpensive, and each different product must be independently tested. As an example, a child's telescope maker was reported to earn $32K on one complex model over a year. They were given a quote of $24K to test the telescope for lead.Prices will rise greatly, or small publishers won't be able to cover the expense of testing each new product and will close, or publishers will cover themselves with a fig leaf by raising the age range to over 12. But why should a government regulator allow the self-interested game makers who only care about profits (*cough*) themselves to do such a maneuver when the game is clearly played, and bought by, kids younger than 12.Then there are all the dice games. The collectible card games. The collectible mini games. All that are a part of the wider gamer orbit. How about the game retailers held liable for selling certified products, sure they can go along hoping they are small fries, but who wouldn't want to be legal? When hobby retailers start trimming their inventory of products that could conceivably be aimed at kids 12 and under, will they be able to still sell enough to stay in business?I'm looking at the bigger picture also, I see this as having dire consequences to the larger hobby.</blockquote>