Do Warning Labels On Flashlights Really Mean Anything?

Reader Bill wrote to us wondering about some cheap flashlights he bought from Amazon. Their warning label says to “Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when using this product…Normal everyday use of this product is likely to expose the user to dust and microscopic particles containing lead and other chemicals known in the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects and other reproductive harm.” Should Bill be worried about the cancer risk and reproductive harm of his flashlights?

In its current state, Proposition 65 is a catch-all for huge list of substances which if used on any product in California, must comply with the required warning labels like the kind we see below on Bill’s flashlight. Because of the way that Proposition 65 is written, the warning label must be used, even if only a minute amount of lead is present.

According to Dr. Subhuti Dharmananda,

The warning labels required by Proposition 65 do not present information about the safety or the risk of the products; the warning about lead does not specify the actual amount of lead that is present or whether any particular amount is harmful. The requirement for a warning label is triggered when the amount of a regulated substance in a product exceeds a certain regulatory level, which is very low in the case of lead. According to the way Proposition 65 is worded and with the limited data about effects of exposure to lead, the labeling must be done if the total daily lead intake exceeds just 0.5 micrograms (µg).

In fact, many contend that Proposition 65 is really just a nuisance which does little more than provide ammunition for private citizens to collect damages from companies that they don’t like. Wikipedia says,

Labeling requirements conceded the reality that listing and classifying substances did not help the consumer if the contents of a purchase were unknown. At the same time, there were no other labeling requirements to support the proposition. Industry critics and corporate defense lawyers charge that Proposition 65 is “a clever and irritating mechanism used by litigious NGOs and others to publicly spank politically incorrect opponents ranging from the American gun industry to seafood retailers, etc.” [4]

In addition, because the law allows private citizens to sue and collect damages from any business violating the law, there have been cases of lawyers and law firms using Proposition 65 to force monetary settlements out of California businesses.[5] The Attorney General’s office has cited several instances of settlements where plaintiff attorneys received significant awards without providing for environmental benefit to the people of California, resulting in the requirement of the Attorney General’s approval of pre-trial Proposition 65 settlements.[6]

Given the proposition’s overly broad scope, even companies who aren’t using hazardous materials, simply go ahead and post the warnings, perhaps, if only to say “don’t sue us!” Wikipedia says,

Nearly all businesses in the state post similar notices on their premises, even when they are unaware of any listed chemicals being present. Warning signs are always posted at gas stations, hardware suppliers,[2] grocery stores, drug stores, and medical facilities.[3] Most government agencies,[4] parking garages, apartment complexes,[5] retail stores,[6] banks, and restaurants[7] also post warning signs because of the possibility of hazardous chemicals being present in everyday items, such as a car or a computer, or because tobacco smoke from a passerby might drift in through an open window. Some large businesses, such as utility companies, mail a Prop 65 notice to all customers each year to warn them of dangerous substances like natural gas[8] or the sand used in sandblasting.[9]

Warning labels that warn against any infinitesimal risk are essentially useless. The outbreak of warning labels spawned by Proposition 65 is so widespread that consumers are being conditioned to ignore them. Even if some of these labels are trying to warn us against a legitimate risk, we are likely to ignore them since these labels “cry wolf” more often than they protect us.

California Proposition 65 (1986) [Wiki]
Proposition 65 [OEHHA]
Frequently Asked Questions About Proposition 65 Lead Warning Labels [ITMOnline]


Edit Your Comment

  1. perruptor says:

    I cannot conceive of any way that normal use of a flashlight could produce dust or particles of lead.

    Just to be safe, though, I’ll stick with my carbide lamp.

  2. Daemon_of_Waffle says:

    Couldn’t this just be a generic warning applied to a variety of products. It mentions California, and I’ve seen similar warnings on other products. This doesn’t seem to be a flashlight specific issue.

  3. Pro-Pain says:

    This does not make sense at all. Does not compute.

  4. Jay Slatkin says:

    @Daemon_of_Waffle: It’s not just flashlights. Flashlights are simply one example of silly labels.

  5. Skipweasel says:

    UK recommendations for changing light bulbs include wearing gloves and safety glasses. Does anyone seriously think that even the people who wrote the advice actually reach for the goggles when a bulb goes?

    My favourite is “Not suitable for children under 36 months due to small parts” on, of all things, a generic Frisbee. I know it seems like it when they’re screaming, but how many toddlers can /really/ open their mouths that wide?

  6. shufflemoomin says:

    The USA should be careful of the way things are going for them as a society. They already have a reputation as a ‘Sue Happy’ country where people will sue for absolutely anything and everything, these labels are just another step down that ridiculous road. Don’t US Citizens get a chance to vote against stuff like this? If so, how do things like this get through?

  7. Canino says:

    Yep, a lot of fishing gear sold in the US has some kind of similar warning even if it doesn’t have lead in it because someone might use a lead sinker in conjunction with the item. I’ve seen lead warnings on soft plastic worms that have no metal whatsoever in them. It’s just extra printing on the package and is otherwise useless. If I were manufacturing something I would be tempted to instead put a warning that the item is not to be transported into California and if it is the user assumes all risk.

  8. @shufflemoomin: It’s California. The home of the 9th Circus Court. The same people who entertained taking “In God we trust” out of the Pledge of Allegiance b/c they think there is a separation of Church and State in the Constitution. Or that the Navy should not use sonar b/c it might hurt whales ears. Seriously, when I hear stupid decisions, California usually pops to mind.

  9. Benny Gesserit says:

    @shufflemoomin: Their elections seem to go on for 2-3 years so I’m sure they must vote on every single thing in their lives.

    Proposition 2321284-M-1:
    Do you agree milk containers will continue to be WHITE?” [ ] Yes [ ] No

    This is the country of “Barbie does not move unaided” and “My coffee was too hot so I’m calling my lawyer” so the best approach is to look at warnings like this and laugh.

  10. doctor_cos wants you to remain calm says:

    @Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: Please stop with the ‘removing’ God from the Pledge of Allegiance.
    “In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, ‘under God,’ to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.”
    The phrase you refer to was NOT ORIGINALLY PART of the Pledge. Don’t trust me, look it up.

    And don’t blame California for all the ills of this country. We are the country who have to ‘protect even the most stupid consumer’ as per the CPSC back in the early 90s.

    Did your keyboard come with a warning label? I bet it did, whether you live on the left coast or not.

    This will get worse before it gets better, as long as We the Sheeple continue to ‘elect’ the same morons to ‘represent’ us.

  11. Rachacha says:

    Signs Signs
    Everywhere there’s signs
    F%*$ing up the scenery
    Breaking my mind
    Do this, don’t do that
    Can’t you read the sign

    Hey California Here is a warning:
    This product is capable of killing you. If you don’t choke on it, or don’t get poisoned by it, we are positive that it can be used to suffocate you or hit you over the head and kill you. Before using this product, be sure to wear a hard hat, steel toe shoes, safety goggles and a respirator. For prolonged use, Self Contained Breathing Apparatus is recommended.

    What is next, a warning on Milk:
    Milk has been shown in the State of California to lead to drug use and addiction.
    (Afterall, most people who use drugs today have drank milk at some point in their life, so therefore drinking milk leads to drug addiction.)

  12. ILoveVermont says:

    I suppose if I bash someone over the head with the flashlight, I should be wearing safety goggles (small flying particles, and all).

  13. rob_p says:

    All I know is that in my state proposition 65 labels are likely to lead to laughter about the state of California.

  14. Syrenia says:

    I live in California, and pretty much the entire state is covered with these labels. For example, the entry gate to my friend’s apartment complex has one. It’s so vague as to be useless, like the peanut warnings on packaged foods. Crystal shop or nuclear power plant — the warning label is the same.

    I hate voter-initiative government. The only people dumber than our elected officials are the bulk of the people who voted for them in the first place. We routinely get competing initiatives on the ballot, and you have to have this matrix in your mind of what happens if one or the other passes, if both pass, or if both fail. One year, the people behind one initiative changed their minds and started supporting one of its two competitors.

    After five years in California, I wonder if Texas doesn’t have the right idea: weak governor + legislators who meet every other year.

  15. All I know is that in my state proposition 65 labels are likely to lead to laughter about the state of California.
    @rob_p: Warning, the normal everday reading of your comment is likely to expose the user to “lead”.

  16. Kevin Cotter says:

    I thought California burned down?

  17. narf says:

    Meh. It’s just a typical warning label on tons of imported stuff sold at discount stores. Looks like the distributor was just covering their ass. At least everything was written properly. I’m sure we’ve all ran across products in which the text was nearly indecipherable.

    That said, the prop.65 warning on some plates and mugs I saw a while back instantly said to me “lead paint”. Yes, they were made in China and were sold at a 99c store.

  18. @doctor_cos: I believe you So if the phrase “under God” is taken out of the pledge, it doesn’t count as removing it? I did not realize that if something is added after it is originally created, it doesn’t “count”. I do note that you didn’t take issue with the fact that the separation of Church and State wasn’t in the original Constitution, but since it’s been added by Judges in the copy they look at, it’s OK to take it out.

    And yes, my keyboard did come with a warning. It is a Microsoft keyboard though, which is based in Seattle, which as you note, is the “left” coast.

  19. timmus says:

    How is it possible that this kind of crap makes it onto warning labels, but there’s NEVER a warning of injury from the sharp edges on the cut blister packs these things come in? What, you say, there’s never been any class-action suit on blister packaging? Well, gollee.

  20. infecto says:

    Its all because of california. I would not even worry two seconds about it. Anything sold in california has to state if it has any potential contaminants. So for instance on your flash light they might use a lead solder or something along those lines. Because of this they have to include that warning. If you get any type of cable that can be sold in Cali. it usually includes the same kind of warning because of the use of lead. If you go to california buildings have to have signs stating what type of potential contaminants are inside.

  21. Thanks, Consumerist, now I’m stuck with mental pictures of how flashlights could possibly cause reproductive harm. Suffice to say, EWWWWWWWWWWWW.

    A lot of these absurd labels are companies’ lazy substitute for quality control; it’s like school permission slips indemnifying everyone on the planet for things you can’t be indemnified for, or people who want me to write custody arrangements into prenups (you can if you want, but in my state they have zero force of law) — it’s a substitute for due care, and a hope that if you write it down in advance and scare people with it, they won’t bother to sue.

    And then it becomes self-fulfilling because EVERYONE does it, so that MUST be the way it’s done, so everyone ELSE does it ….

  22. Ubermunch says:

    I own like 6 of the exact same LED flashlights. The sell for about $5 on Amazon and come with 3 AAA batteries to boot! The quality on each light is a bit spotty with one of my lights flickering a bit (after a few drops to tile flooring, though) although some lights seem to be virtually indestructible (like any Made in China special). The give off a LOT of light and are really small. I’ve even bought a few for friends and relatives.


    That said….

    I’m sure the lead warning is for the lead based solder used for the LEDs and their small circuit board. If you saw the flashlight in person you could see that there would be no way for the solder to get hot enough and the vapors to leak out enough to cause ANY human damage. To slap a label of these is silly.

    Then again…

    There is a LOT of lead, relatively speaking, in most electric appliance cords, xmas light wires, etc. It’s a cheap way to keep the insulation pliable without cracking. You should probably wash your hands after handling most of those things… or wear gloves.

  23. @shufflemoomin:

    The USA should be careful of the way things are going for them as a society. They already have a reputation as a ‘Sue Happy’ country where people will sue for absolutely anything and everything…

    There has been some backlash against this propensity for suing at the drop of a hat. While it’s still out of control, many more ridiculous lawsuits are being thrown out.

    … these labels are just another step down that ridiculous road. Don’t US Citizens get a chance to vote against stuff like this? If so, how do things like this get through?

    We like to call ourselves a democracy, but we’re really a Republic. We vote for people who go to public office and create things like Proposition 65. So yes, we do indirectly vote for this stuff. The only recourse is to recall the senator/representative, etc. by voting someone else in, and hope they reverse it.

    Things like this often have a noble beginning, but after committee after committee, they often lose their effectiveness, or become just silly. Like Prop 65.

  24. dragonvpm says:

    @shufflemoomin & Jim (The Canuck One): Well, at least we don’t have riots as often as some European countries or CCTV cameras as far as the eye can see (although some cities are moving in the direction).

    California means well, but their biggest failing is that while the rest of the country is happy to stupidly believe the more conservative and business oriented interests out there, Californians tend to believe the activists above all else. So in both cases you end up in situations without enough compromise and without enough people being critical of the claims being bandied about by those making the most fuss. The net result being California ends up with things like Proposition 65, and the rest of the country ends up believing nearly bankrupt domestic auto makers who claim that substantially better gas mileage is a damn near impossible goal (regardless of what auto makers in other countries can do).

  25. nursetim says:

    John Stossel did a special years ago about warning labels. The best part was when he had a fire log and pointed out the warning label that stated the product was flammable. The point of the show was that people ignore warning labels because they are everywhere and “warn” about any little thing that could cause harm.

  26. backbroken says:

    @nursetim: Very true. Of course, the point of warning labels is not to keep consumers safe. It’s to CYA in a lawsuit.

  27. This notice is also on strings of Christmas lights. You’re supposed to wash your hands after handling the cords.

    Me, I like to suck my fingers.

  28. RandomHookup says:

    The Army’s Claymore mines used to have a warning on the back: DO NOT EAT.

  29. newfenoix says:

    @RandomHookup: That was on the back of the mine. On the was the words: FRONT: TOWARD ENEMY.

  30. snoop-blog says:

    Tryin to live as long as you can is overrated

  31. NotATool says:

    @loquaciousmusic: There’s lead in the cord insulation to keep it pliable. I actually tested mine last Christmas with a lead test kit. The Christmas light cords were the only thing I tested which showed positive for lead.

  32. selectman says:

    @Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: The whole concept of a pledge of allegiance is pretty undemocratic, no? Something more suited to Mussolini’s Italy.

    The funny thing is how differently people view the sight of people pledging to a flag other than their own. Like, say, seeing a classroom of Chinese children paying homage to The Party. That is seen as freedom-stifling and threatening.

  33. newfenoix says:

    Welcome to the USA! We are a stupidacracy. Most of country suffers from terminal dumbass. I am 46 and my parents taught me that coffee was hot and it will burn you and that knives are shape and they will cut you and that cleansers are toxic and they will kill you as will guns, etc., etc. I used to believe that these warning labels were just a stupid waste of time but I was wrong. It is the other people that are stupid. They don’t understand that LIFE ITSELF is hazardous to your health. And pretty soon we are going to have warnings on EVERYTHING. In closing, in 2005 Paul Harvey reported on an unnamed northern state that had a state legislator that wanted to make a point about how stupid people really were. So he introduced a bill that would outlaw the sale, possession and use of a substance known as dihydrogen oxide. He pointed out that it kills more people per year than any other chemical compound known to man. The legislature passed the bill, applauding themselves that they were the first in the nation to outlaw this most dangerous of chemicals. The bill was sent to the governor for signature. That’s when he asked the wise people in the state government why they wanted to outlaw WATER!!??? Yes they outlawed water. Is there any hope for a country like this???

  34. cerbie says:

    @Jim (The Canuck One): “Barbie does not move unaided” — what?

    @Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: yes, it was added so much later…we see it in 1802, as an interpretation of the 1st amendment. Being explicitly added due to actions of a religious organization does make the phrase a wee bit suspect, no?

    @Ubermunch: there could be lead in/on the plastic of the battery carrier, on the solder that you can touch around that, in the metal, possibly in the anodize solution, in the plastic of the switch cap…

    Such labels are really useless. It would be nice to know what parts that you may come in contact with contain the lead.

  35. @newfenoix:

    Welcome to the USA! We are a stupidacracy. Most of country suffers from terminal dumbass. …In closing, in 2005 Paul Harvey reported on an unnamed northern state that had a state legislator that wanted to make a point about how stupid people really were. So he introduced a bill that would outlaw the sale, possession and use of a substance known as dihydrogen oxide. …Yes they outlawed water. Is there any hope for a country like this???

    Two points:
    1) If you don’t like it here, do something about it or leave. Don’t complain and do nothing – that’s just annoying.
    2) Check your story – the only evidence I could find of somebody trying to outlaw water was in New Zealand: []

    Is that the same kind of “terminal dumbass” you were talking about? The kind that believes everything he hears on the radio or Internet?

  36. opsomath says:

    I want to raise an issue that I don’t hear much about: the danger of overprotective warning labels.

    I am a chemist. I work with genuinely dangerous materials every day, that if you mishandle them have a pretty good chance of blowing you up, catching your arm on fire, or burning symmetric little oval holes in your skin. Naturally, the packaging for these materials is wall-to-wall carpeted with warnings.

    Sadly, so are the labels for glycerine, baking soda, chalk, and silica, all of which can be ingested in safe concentrations.

    Essentially, the proliferation of warning labels serves as camouflage for dangerous stuff; the scary substances’ labels look just the same as the innocuous things. A non-expert will quickly grow oversaturated, and ignore the warnings; then they will probably turn themselves into Two-face by ignoring the warnings on Red Devil Lye.

    Take a stand for real safety, a stand against stupid warning labels!

  37. mrbill says:

    I actually sent in “ha ha look at this silly warning label, the world’s most dangerous flashlight!”, and knew it was a generic warning.

    Here’s the rest of the pictures, and yes, these are a great deal for $5.50 each especially since they come with batteries.

  38. Do the batteries have warning labels? I suggest the Claymore mine “DO NOT EAT” designator.

  39. Elvisisdead says:

    @Jim (The Canuck One): Personally, I’d rather vote on everything as part of a democracy than have it decided for me as part of a socialist collective ruled by a frigging monarch.

  40. donkeyjote says:

    You guys are getting gyped. I get those flashlights at the dollar store.

  41. ARP says:

    @Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: Where to begin:

    1) “In God We Trust” was never in the Pledge of the Alliegence and it’s still not today. “One nation, under God…” is the phrase you’re looking for. If you’re going to have such outrage, please at least be accurate about what you’re mad at.
    2) As others have noted, a Catholic organization lobbied to have it added during the 50’s. Most agreed because they thought they could weed out the Communists because they wouldn’t say it (never mind an eight year old will say it, just so they don’t feel stupid).
    3) Separation of Church and State was concept that the founding fathers advocated. The courts simply enacted it.
    4) Since you’re all about “original intent,” can you please location the place in the Constitution, where is says we are, “one nation under God” or a nation under God.

    To the issue, I agree that stpid warning labels inevitably create more problems because people become desensitized to them and don’t pay attention when there is a real danger. The courts have gotten away from what the standard should be, what a reasonable person would think/do. Then again, if you look at the police blotter in the paper and Youtube, you wonder if maybe they’re right after all.

  42. brettbee says:

    @InfiniTrent: “We like to call ourselves a democracy, but we’re really a Republic. We vote for people who go to public office and create things like Proposition 65.”

    Uh, I’m from the opposite coast, but aren’t Propositions voter-initiated ballot questions? i.e. not at all a product of a republican (form of, not party of) government?

  43. Benny Gesserit says:

    @Elvisisdead: Whatever you need to maintain an illusion of control over your life, man.

  44. draketrumpet says:

    In case you are all wondering, according to proposition 65, anyone in the state of California is legally required to append all of their speech with the following:

    “I contain materials known to the state of California to cause cancer, birth defects, and other reproductive harm. Please wash hands after handling.”

  45. incognit000 says:

    Californians have one of the worst legal systems I’ve seen, and the “sue everyone” nature that exists out there results in a lot of very dumb signage.

    I think that this is just more proof that the Californian legal system is broken and that there are too many people who want to be babied and pandered to by their government and the places they shop at.

  46. draketrumpet says:

    For great flashlights that don’t say they will cause birth defects etc., try these:
    This one with batteries: []
    This one without, but its a little better light: []
    Yes, I’ve used both of these, and they’re great, non carcinogenic, light sources.

  47. Marshfield says:

    Never mind the lead warning.

    I’m trying to recall the last time I nearly put an eye out when using a flashlight.

  48. LostAngeles says:

    @Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: That’d be the copy with the Bill of Rights? That were added on immediately after writing it to ensure to the states that the new government, after fighting with Britain over certain things wasn’t going to turn around and do the same. Where it states Congress may pass no law with respect to a particular religion? The Congress who put, “…under God…” into the Pledge? Just so we’re clear here.

    Back OT: When I moved here, I just assumed that they were on buildings that still had traces of asbestos or something that couldn’t be removed easily for some reason. Although I think my elementary school was stripped of asbestos in 1990 or something. I vaguely remember a whole deal about that. I was primarily concerned at the time with nuclear war, myself.

  49. Orv says:

    @newfenoix: Just as an aside, I would be careful using Paul Harvey as a source. He tends to fall for a lot of urban legends.

  50. newfenoix says:

    @InfiniTrent: Stupidity is stupidity and thinking like that is one of the reasons that this country is in the shape that it is in.

  51. newfenoix says:

    Here’s the point to what I was trying to point out; this country has gone over board with warnings. There is a such a thing as personal responsibility. If you burn yourself with hot coffee, it’s no one’s fault but your own. These unnecessary warnings are put on products because of the stupidity of the users. And to protect the company from being sued because of that stupidity. I saw tons of it when I was a cop and I see even more of it in management.

  52. newfenoix says:

    @opsomath: It will never happen. People just don’t understand.

  53. Snowblind says:


    The phrase separation of church and state comes from a constitution, just not the USA’s.

    “In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church. “


    Here, we have the limited requirement that the government not endorse any church… not expunge it from public discourse.

  54. @brettbee:

    Uh, I’m from the opposite coast, but aren’t Propositions voter-initiated ballot questions? i.e. not at all a product of a republican (form of, not party of) government

    Good question – I’m in Kentucky, and haven’t personally voted on a “Proposition” before. I hadn’t considered that possibility. They call them a Referendum vote here, when the public votes to certify a decision by the gov’t.

  55. @newfenoix:

    Stupidity is stupidity and thinking like that is one of the reasons that this country is in the shape that it is in.

    Thinking like my thinking, or like the guy I was responding to?

  56. Oh wait, you’re the guy. So now I totally don’t understand what you’re trying to say.

  57. AgentTuttle says:

    MADE IN CHINA is the real warning. They are innovators in lead delivery and it seems they’ve gotten lead to bond with photons. Cool, a death ray!

  58. varro says:

    @Kevin Cotter: Yes, whenever California has a natural or man-made (riots, arson wildfires) disaster, a special division of the National Guard has to go around putting up those “Substances known to the State of California to cause cancer” signs everywhere…

  59. @AgentTuttle:

    MADE IN CHINA is the real warning. They are innovators in lead delivery…

    The funny thing is that import restrictions in China are extreme, especially with lead. If your product includes lead, it’s almost impossible to import into China.

    Now, that doesn’t stop them from exporting tainted dog food or flashlights – but then again, all their laws are set up to bring foreign dollars in, and keep them in.

  60. doctor_cos wants you to remain calm says:

    @Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: Removing ‘under God’ would not have the same relevance as removing a phrase which was part of the original.
    The Bill of Rights vs. the “original Constitution”??? Are you serious?
    So “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” doesn’t count?
    No, instead, let’s continue to piss off:
    1. People in this country who don’t believe in “God” by leaving “under God” there, and putting it on our currency, which a. isn’t ours (the Federal Reserve Bank is not part of the government), and b. didn’t start until the late 1950’s, but that doesn’t matter either I guess.
    2. People in other countries and this one who are offended by politicians and others talking about our “God-given” rights to invade other countries to protect our ‘freedoms’ and this “God Bless America” crap. So bless America, but the hell with the rest of the world?

    It upsets me how relatively recent additions to the national lexicon (“GOD”) are now inferred by many to be the intent of the founding fathers. This country was started by people who didn’t like the fact that religion was forced upon them. How is “under God” and “In God we trust” ANY DIFFERENT?

    Sorry to hijack the comments :)

  61. theczardictates says:

    @doctor_cos: Go get ’em, doc. I find it hilarious that anybody could seriously think (as the KoC apparently did) that communist spies couldn’t possibly bring themselves to say “under God”, but would be capable of falsely swearing to the rest of the Oath of allegiance.

    BTW, California still has a “loyalty oath” for public employees — because really, nobody who was planning to commit a crime would ever compound it by falsely swearing loyalty to the state, would they?

  62. doctor_cos wants you to remain calm says:

    @ARP: Sorry, I missed your reply about “under God” , didn’t mean to step on you as your #4 illustrates my attitude.
    @LostAngeles: Apologies to you also, your turn of phrase (‘The Congress who put…’) does sound a bit more civil.
    And I’m not attacking Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy personally, as that would expose the jealousy over the much cooler screen name :)
    And amen to theczardictates for pointing out the utter absurdity as opposed to ‘loyalty oaths’.

    Lost in all there, I still would defend the idiocy of California’s Proposition 65 as a symptom of the country as a whole becoming a venomous, litigious group of self-entitled, self-centered bastards who on one hand need protection from every little thing which might hurt us, while at the same time whine and complain about gubbamint interference.
    I have an answer. When you hear the obviously stupid crap coming out of the mouths of Republicans AND Democrats, stand up and let them know that you know it’s Bullshit (with a capital B.) Don’t change the channel, change the programming :)

  63. masterthundar says:

    Damn, California seems to have a lot of these problems. We need to keep all these things away from there; they seem to turn dangerous when they cross that border…must be the illegal immigrants.

  64. rob_p says:

    It does seem as though these warnings are a bit pointless though. For example the law requires a warning on ethylene glycol (anti-freeze) for reproductive reasons. Of course you are probably going to die from poisoning first. But according to the state of California the real worry is about the reproductive health impact it can have.

  65. msbluesky says:

    I once saw this label (“known in the State of California . . .”) on a package of pencils (yes, pencils) and I couldn’t help but laugh by thinking, “Well at least I’m not in California, because then these things might give me cancer or cause reproductive harm!”

    I do think these labels diminish the effect of warnings on truly hazardous materials and that is a clearly bad development.

  66. mrearly2 says:

    The worst thing about it, is that it’s Made in China.

  67. Rusted says:

    @Git Em SteveDave is a poor substitute for LindsayJoy: I’ll never say “under god” in the Pledge of Allegiance. Never. Separation of church and state.

    @Ubermunch: Maglite, own two mini’s. They have been dropped, washed, abused and they don’t even flicker. Made in the USA. Looking at one now, managed to wear it down to the metal.

    @mrearly2: Ditto.