Old Nacy? Who's she?

I'm actually surprised that's considered a safety hazard...I remember having a few jackets like that, with drawstrings, when I was a kid, and I don't think it ever got caught on the school bus and injured me. Next up: shoelaces being recalled due to risk of tripping.

@viriiman: She's driving the bus.

How many times does that situation really happen on a bus though? I mean, when I was younger, there was a bus monitor who would be first one off to let children cross and then would wait until all the kids were safely away from the bus and then get back on.

Wtf? How is that a safety hazard?

Nacy = Old Navy bred to Macy's

Spelling? 'Nacy' = 'Navy'?

I'm sure the jacket itself would disintegrate well before the draw-string could actually trap the kid. This is "Old Nacy" we are talking about here.

@viriiman: I think it's one of those look-alike Rip-off brands in China.

Someone should be named Old Nacy. It's just too awesome.

@msb2: It's clearly happening to the child in the drawing. No one thinks of the poor children in drawings, and all the injuries they have to sustain just to show us every possible way in which we can hurt ourselves.

Also, where are these buses that let kids off on the driver's side?

In all the years I rode a bus, I never saw this happen. And if it had happened, the driver always watched to make sure everybody was clear of the bus before taking off.

I wonder what that kid's gonna say when they let his drawstring go?

And the Cow Says.... MooooooO!

Um. Why is this news?

They get a full refund on the jacket in addition to the gift card. OK, it's a bit on the cheapskate side. What did you expect, a refund and a free jacket?

The headline's really misleading. Shame on you, consumerist.

I love the logic that some people employ here - "I've never seen it happen, so how could it be a safety hazard?"

Anyhoo from [www.kidsource.com]

From January 1985 through September 1995, CPSC received reports of 17 deaths and 42 non- fatal incidents involving the entanglement of children's clothing drawstrings....

...CPSC's drawstring guidelines do not represent a standard or mandatory requirement set by the agency. And, while CPSC does not sanction them as the only method of minimizing drawstring injuries, CPSC believes that these guidelines will help prevent children from strangling by their clothing drawstrings.

seriously, are we as a population getting stupider?* or is all this overblown safety crap to avoid actions by our more litigious citizens.

*purposefully incorrect.

@Jim (The Canuck One): What exactly is misleading about the headline?

And it's news because, I don't know, a major retail chain is recalling a product. Would you prefer that news of safety recalls were suppressed?

"you've essentially been paid $5 to let your kid to wear a jacket."

Proofreading? Please? Make it a position on staff to proofread the article headlines and text and correct them. I beg of you.

I like how in the drawing the kid is looking back at the bus like "oh, crap!"

Wait, don't this jackets have sleeves as well? Sleeves catch on things, too! I demand satisfaction in the form of more recalls and gift cards!

$5 at Old Navy, that's got to buy you like 2 pairs of sweatpants! Wait, don't sweatpants have drawstrings in the same area? (Recall?) Is that bad? What if they get caught on the waist drawstrings from the jacket? Can you imagine some little kid peeing in his pants because he can't get the pants separated from the jacket?

Attention Consumerist: You might want to let your editor to find a new job.

@spinachdip: Rational thought is discouraged here. It irritates the slow kids. Please stop it.

@Sidecutter: I second that motion!

@DeanOfAllTrades: When I was in 1st grade, I once peed my pants because my belt was too complicated and I couldn't get it off in time. I now insist on a recall of all belts.

Love that diagram!

Drawstrings are now a "safety hazard" for kids? WTF!? Is EVERYTHING a safety hazard for kids today? What is wrong with this coutry?

I weep for our nation's youth, they're going to grown up to be pussies...

So it's a stupid reason for a recall-- the point is it's out there, and Old Navy is taking an exceptional step up in responsibility.

Imagine Wal-mart taking this kind of action towards the Chineese Poision Train.

I could rake it in with Thomas the Tank and Aqua Dot recalls-- I might even make enough to afford real GHB!

Who woulda thought that Luke Wilson's Idiocracy movie where he wakes up in the future and everybody's stupid is going to become reality?

How bout recalling Nalgene bottles because they could create a similar problem.

Or ensuring all electrical cables to be easily snappable and the electricity blocked in case a kid decides to strangle him/herself.

Or how about having people drive 1MPH if you have kids in tow because driving is UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED (but 1MPH because you gotta get there somehow).

Really dumb. People who push for these measures are only bringing us closer to a future of stupid moronic citizens.

This is a safety issue for the kids that are being raised by idiot parents.

@ninjatales: I agree! I'm thinking we need to weed out the stupid/slow children.

Release the leopards!

Oh, P.S. sarcasm

Why are you people getting so worked up? Old Navy decided it didn't want a product out there with a potentially, albeit unlikely, fatal safety hazard, so it announced a voluntary recall, and offered customers a small reward for their trouble. It wasn't mandated by CPSC or the government, and it's up to the parents to return the jackets. Why are you so against consumers and corporations making their own decisions?

Granted, it's an overreaction over such a seemingly minor issue, but it's nothing compare to the foaming-mouth "OMG we're a nation of idiots and pansies!!!" reaction from you lot. Get a grip.

@spinachdip: The way the headline is worded implies that you're not going to get a refund, but merely a $5 gift card.

At least that's the way I read it.

@Gev: Understood. Based on my knowledge of recalls, a refund or exchange is implied.

The part I don't get is this:

You can either cut the drawstring out, or return the jacket to Old Navy for a full refund and get a $5 gift card for your trouble, meaning you've essentially been paid $5 to let your kid to wear a jacket.

No, I've been paid $5 for NOT letting my kid wear it...

The way I see it is that Old Navy is paying you $5 to bring it back... they COULD just issue you a refund and be done with it, but they're giving shoppers an additional $5 for the trouble of bringing it back.

@DrGirlfriend:

This guy has saw fit to document it in great detail: [www.capnwacky.com]

In the mid to late 90's a middle school age girl in my town was run over by the school bus as her draw strings were trapped in the stair railing and closed bus door. The children riding the bus screamed at the bus driver to stop as the girl ran with the bus. He would not stop. She ran until she could no longer keep up and was dragged a few hundred feet by the bus until the straps gave way and she was then run over by the bus.

Since briefs and boxers can be used to give wedgies, we must pass a Federal law mandating all boys (do girls ever get wedgies?!) go commando.

PS: the silhouette of Drawstring Boy, above, made me think of the pressing Wedgie issue. Maybe they can re-use the graphic for the impending ban? Economies of Scale!

When I was in first grade, I pulled the drawstrings on the waist of my jacket as taught as I could and then tied them into a knot. When I was done being a weird kid, I tried to untie it and couldn't so I started freaking out. I had to have my teacher cut it off for me.

I've never had a draw string get tangled on anything.

I have gotten POCKETS caught on things plenty of times.

Ban pockets.

My son has this jacket... This afternoon after school he ripped the lining. Cool a replacement jacket and $5 old navy credit!

We buy a bunch of cloths for his little brother at old navy. Who cares that the clothes only last 6 months, when a toddler grows out of his clothes every 3 months.

@ancientsociety:
Wou've got that right. Childhood is when one is SUPPOSED to get hurt, so that later in life you can differentiate between a scraped knee and broken leg.

Today's children will, indeed, be pussies, and assume that every scraped knee is in fact a broken leg.

These Democommies should just determine that life itself is hazardous, and ban it altogether.
What happened to personal responsibility?

@DeanOfAllTrades: I did buy a few pairs of sweatpants from Ol'Navy for my toddler - and they did have "drawstrings" - but they were fake. They still come untied - but they're only like 4 inches long and sewn to the waist band. . I think it's to be "cute" - like boy's clothing needs to be cute.

We're probably better off without a kid that can't figure out how not to choke himself in a drawstring.

@TangDrinker:

It isn't cute for the boy's sake, it's cute for the mother's sake.

@LVP: Based on the comments in this thread:
a) This didn't actually happen because I didn't see it happen, or it didn't happen to me.
b) If it did, it was because the girl was stupid or retarded, and therefore we're better off that she's dead.
c) Her parents were stupid as well, and they therefore deserved this.

Well, to be fair, I think the snark in this thread is largely due to the fact that, to a near totality, everyone here, as a child (and adult), owned an article of clothing with a drawstring. And lived to tell the tale. Except for the nefarious undead commentators (we know who you are, brain-eaters and boy are we keeping our eyes on you!).

It's a tad absurd.