No, that's a (mostly) fair point. I'd distinguish between objects whose dangers are obvious and those whose aren't.
The danger of hammers is obvious. You know to treat them safely, and so there's comparatively little trouble. The possibility of having an untreatable needle stuck in your throat unless you use your tools in the right order is rather less so.
I didn't say anything about banning unsafe objects, however. I think there's a case to be made for it if they're easily replaceable, but that's not the point I put forward.
I don't think so. Its a common argument that generally available products should be safe by default, not safe because of training. The reply is a bit of a straw man, there's obviously nuances to that stance. In this case, expecting _everyone_ to know exactly how a wire brush is unsafe is not realistic. If there weren't alternatives, well, there wouldn't be much to do. But in this case, there's plenty of safe alternatives to wire brushes, thus a strong argument can be made that they should simply be banned.
What would such a ban look like? No wire brushes for BBQs? What about the wire brushes they have in the hardware aisle? Do they need to add 'not for BBQs' to the label?
Seems like good fodder for tabloid evening news and then just let it be.
Most people are just going to go to the barbecue aisle and find the "safe" brushes. Someone really determined to buy a wire brush might find the rust-scrapers or something, but that's no different from paint thinner not being sold as a household cleaner.
It makes sense to me to make the safe option into the easiest, most obvious path to take. Stop labeling wire brushes as "barbecue brushes", and stop stocking them directly alongside the cooking tools. That's the form I imagine a ban would take.
As an aside on the BBQ brushes & Home Depot. This seems like a great consumer education opportunity that could build some goodwill. Surely HD, or at least the HD merchandising team, is aware of this issue.
