Would California's AB44 ban fur felt hats?

[Pat_H]

California is debating AB44, which would ban fur products, and it occurred to me that fur felt hats are a type of fur products.

Does anyone know if this has been explored? I.e., would the proposal, if it become law, ban fur felt hats in California?

 

[M Brown]

I foresee a big market in 100% Kale Felt!

 

[M Brown]

I foresee a big market in 100% Kale Felt!

 

[hatophile]

If so, there will be some might ticked off cowboys, if there are any left out there.

 

[Bamaboots]

If so, there will be some might ticked off cowboys, if there are any left out there.

May not be. Kangaroo leather has been banned there since the 70's. You know how rare the kangaroo is, just ask any Aussie.

 

[Hurricane Jack]

You can still buy the 100 oz Big Gulp in CA but you can't have a straw to drink it with.

 

[deadlyhandsome]

The good:

1. It hasn’t passed yet.
2. It doesn’t apply to used items
3. It doesn’t include hats in the list of specified items to be banned
4. If passed, it won’t become law until 2023
5. It isn’t criminal (civil penalties only).
6. It mentioned amending a current law that requires the manufacturers currently requires manufacturers to label items with the types of fur used. As far as I know, Stetson et al don’t currently label hats in this manner (I.e., 80% rabbit, 20% beaver). Maybe the law won’t apply to hats?

The bad:

1. No denying that fur felt hats are made from fur that requires the killing of the animal.
2. It’s easy to see it passing in California.
3. Although hats are not specified, the proposed law has a catch-all clause.

Time will tell.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[T Jones]

You'd think that California's elected office holders would be more concerned about having serious discussions on how to deal with their homeless crisis rather than debating about banning fur products and plastic straws.

 

[jlee562]

Interesting. The text does seem like it would eliminate fur felt hats. SF already has an existing ban, but I wrote one of the Supervisors, who wrote back saying a fur felt product would not be targeted by the city ban.

The good:

1. It hasn’t passed yet.
2. It doesn’t apply to used items
3. It doesn’t include hats in the list of specified items to be banned
4. If passed, it won’t become law until 2023
5. It isn’t criminal (civil penalties only).
6. It mentioned amending a current law that requires the manufacturers currently requires manufacturers to label items with the types of fur used. As far as I know, Stetson et al don’t currently label hats in this manner (I.e., 80% rabbit, 20% beaver). Maybe the law won’t apply to hats?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I dunno Brent, I read these two as banning hats except for religious exemption...

(1) “Fur” means any animal skin or part thereof with hair, fleece, or fur fibers attached thereto, either in its raw or processed state.
(2) (A) “Fur product” means any article of clothing or covering for any part of the body, or any fashion accessory, including, but not limited to, handbags, shoes, slippers, hats, earmuffs, scarves, shawls, gloves, jewelry, keychains, toys or trinkets, and home accessories and decor, that is made in whole or in part of fur.

though "animal skin or part thereof" might reasonably be argued to not include fur fibers that have been removed...maybe.

You can still buy the 100 oz Big Gulp in CA but you can't have a straw to drink it with.

Ha! Now we have reusable metal straws.....perfect for tracheotomies!

You'd think that California's elected office holders would be more concerned about having serious discussions on how to deal with their homeless crisis rather than debating about banning fur products and plastic straws.

they're not mutually exclusive. I have no love for most politicians of any stripe, but state and local governments haven't been ignoring homelessness in favor of fur bans.

 

[Bamaboots]

Ha! Now we have reusable metal straws.....perfect for tracheotomies!

Waiting on the first fatality from one of those.

 

[Hurricane Jack]

Ha! Now we have reusable metal straws.....perfect for tracheotomies!

What's ironic is the 100 oz Big Gulp probably comes in a small plastic bucket.

Do you get one reusable metal straw per lifetime...or with every free refill?

 

[Cornshucker77]

May not be. Kangaroo leather has been banned there since the 70's. You know how rare the kangaroo is, just ask any Aussie.

LOL!!

 

[AbbaDatDeHat]

Waiting on the first fatality from one of those.

Metal trachs....that’s sooo 70’s!
B

 

[Zombie_61]

You can still buy the 100 oz Big Gulp in CA but you can't have a straw to drink it with.

We can't have straws because they're made from plastic and are therefore harmful to wildlife and the environment. But the plastic lids, plastic cups, plastic sporks, plastic take-out containers, and any other plastic items in the food service industry aren't just as harmful? Why haven't they banned those items as well? For this and a number of other issues, I'm often embarrassed to admit I'm a native Californian.

 

[Rmccamey]

Agreed 1000%.

You'd think that California's elected office holders would be more concerned about having serious discussions on how to deal with their homeless crisis rather than debating about banning fur products and plastic straws.

 

[AbbaDatDeHat]

We can't have straws because they're made from plastic and are therefore harmful to wildlife and the environment. But the plastic lids, plastic cups, plastic sporks, plastic take-out containers, and any other plastic items in the food service industry aren't just as harmful? Why haven't they banned those items as well? For this and a number of other issues, I'm often embarrassed to admit I'm a native Californian.

That’s how it starts.
First a straw...then a spork...next thing you know it’s your kids!
The last thing to go....THE MAN!!
B

 

[Frunobulax]

NYC was considering the same thing and I wondered about JJ Hat and Bencraft.

All of my hats are organic and locally sourced.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

 

[T Jones]

Agreed 1000%.

Yup, and my point being that California's elected office holders don't have greater things to concern themselves with? San Francisco, i.e., has a homeless crisis with human feces on the streets, dirty needles, garbage, rodents, disease, ...and they're going to worry about plastic straws and banning fur products? Maybe it's just me, but I would think that the greater issue would be to resolve the human tragedy in the streets of their cities.

 

[Rmccamey]

Yes sir. Here in Texas, our legislators wasted time creating a law that forbid kids from selling lemonade on their front sidewalk and then had to spend even more time, money and effort making another law to allow it. As you say, homeless in Dallas, a real and useful immigration policy, mental health resources...so many larger and more important issues to deal with.

Yup, and my point being that California's elected office holders don't have greater things to concern themselves with? San Francisco, i.e., has a homeless crisis with human feces on the streets, dirty needles, garbage, rodents, disease, ...and they're going to worry about plastic straws and banning fur products? Maybe it's just me, but I would think that the greater issue would be to resolve the human tragedy in the streets of their cities.

 

[Hurricane Jack]

All of my hats are organic...

That's the same thing Burger King says about their new plant mulch Impossible Whopper.