CPSC idiot proofing

I carry loose marbles in my store. I love to watch the kids go through the pails and select their favorite few. I am required by law to post a sign with them that says "Warning, Loose Marbles...Choking Hazard." etc. and so forth. To this I have added a sign of my own that reads "While we have your attention, we should also like to advise you that running with scissors can lead to missing eyeballs." In other words, we are sorry to insult you (and clutter up our display) with ridiculously obvious warnings. Everyone knows that marbles are a choking hazard. Actually, I would say that everyone BELIEVES that marbles are a choking hazard. I have personally found that standard sized marbles are both too small and too smooth to pose any real choking threat. Contrary to popular belief, they pass through the system without any real changes to the system, or the marble. But, for the sake of today's argument we can say that it is well known that marbles are a choking hazard. Why do I need to post a sign? But I have, no big. Now though, the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) has decided that we need labels on every web image, every catalog image, any print material that aims to sell a toy to a child. Labels on EVERY image that might in some way if miss used harm a child. These requirements do not apply to television commercials (*gasp!* next thing you know they would have to actually say that captain crunch is bad for you on their advertising), but for stores that have a web-site, like hopscotch, and catalog, like hopscotch, it is a real nightmare to become compliant. Worse than that, I believe it defeats the purpose of having warnings. The way it is now, if a toy has a warning, parents read it carefully, they recognize that there are real hazards involved with this toy. I fear that when labels are everywhere, they will become invisible to the consumer. I understand that this is a reaction to the pressure to do something in response to all of the toy recalls from 2007, but I feel that it is too much effort in the wrong direction. Though I must admit that having more careful guidelines may have helped my parents with their toy offerings. And now, I present the top ten worst toys as compiled by radar online
#1: Lawn Darts - Nothing like a metal spike in your head to cement friendship.
#2: The Atomic Energy Lab - complete with Geiger-counter and Uranium bearing ore -
#3: Mini Hammocks that can strangle your children to death.
#4: The Snacktime Cabbage Patch Doll, capable of eating carrots, ponytails or fingers with gay abandon and probably inspiration for the “Chucky” horror movies.
#5: The Skydancer Barbie Rocket - guaranteed to leap from her perch and slice your eyes out.
#6: the Bat Masterson Derringer Belt Gun - because flaming gunpowder near your testicles is a good thing.
#7: The Creepy Crawly Stove-top Goop - toxic and hundreds of degrees in temperature, great to throw at your sister.
#8: The Johnny Reb, 30-inch “authentic civil war” cannon - complete with cannon balls, ramrod and civil war flag - my personal favourite due to the embedded youtube video advert from the early 60’s
#9: The Battlestar Galactica Missile Launcher - missing eyes, torn intestines - cylon love all round.
#10: The Fisher Price Power Wheels Motorcycle - replete with sticking accelerator pedal, guaranteed break-neck Christmas morning fun.

I think recently I would add Aquadots, the SpinMaster product that would create a date rape drug affect in your child if he or she put them in their mouth.
All in all I'd have to say that I trust that intelligent parents are going to know a dangerous toy when they see it, (and sometimes decide that the benefits outweigh the risks). I also believe that no amount of labeling will protect the child of a careless parent, and that sometimes even careful parents find that circumstances conspire to the worst end, again not something that can be prevented by a label. Now I think I'll take my ten year old and go jump on the trampoline.