Just to add a small amount of balance to the discussion I'll start by saying I'm a big supporter of SEMA and it's vigilence in trying to support the hobbyist as well as the business side of the hobby. Second, I do some painting at home too so have a vested interest in continuing to have some freedom in that arena.

That being said, I read some of the commentary on the linked site and see a lot of b.s., though it's understandable coming from people who don't know what they're talking about, so only see their perception. And this isn't intended to be a criticism of them, it's to point out what issues and perceptions are involved so that if you choose to get involved you can approach it in an informed fashion which will help in fighting for a rational rather than a reactive solution.

The first thing that made me laugh was the comment that body shop owners wanted to force the hobbyist into coming to them for a paint job. Having been one of those evil conspirators I'll tell you that when I had my shop you couldn't pay me enough to paint your car complete. It was too much of a disruption of my production flow. Now, there are probably some shops out there that would think that way, but they are not the leading, or most prominent (representation wise) in the industry.

As one of those posters mentioned, it is an expensive proposition (both in time and money, which in a business is really the same thing) to be a properly maintained shop from an environmental perspective. Also, in the strictest interpretation of the current laws, the shop owner is responsible for the hazardous material from cradle to grave (I'll be keeping my documentation and shipping manifests until the day I die). In a technical sense the laws as they exist are nearly unworkable, the only thing that allows the industry to operate is that enforcement to the letter can't be done. And therein lies the rub. What happens is that enforcement is very subjective and spotty. When one shop is "disciplined" the operator expresses indignation because he knows there are hundreds (thousands?) of other shops doing the same thing and they're not being punished. It's the luck (bad) of the draw thing.

I was involved in a review of enforcement/risk policies some ten years ago and saw some interesting info. While the jobbers were very reluctant to give us exact figures, we were able to get enough info to do some extrapolations. Our best info indicated that the licensed shops were responsible for 55-60% of the refinish materials purchases in Western Washington. It may vary in other parts of the country, but it's probably reasonably representative. That means that 40-45% of the "hazardous" material is un-regulated. If you look at the individual hobbyist comments, they only see the world from their personal 1 gallon, or two quart, whatever, point of view. But from the other side, the cumulative effect is close to half the product sold is not under scrutiny. If you put yourself in the place of the guy who is saddled with a lifelong legal responsibility, and the associated costs of meeting regulations, you might say "if it's so important to control this stuff, why is only my half of the problem getting 100% of the attention/punishment potential?" Therein lies a greater reason for the shops to push their agenda, rather than the quirky notion they want to force all the hobbyists to their door.

If push comes to shove, I would prefer to see some kind of program that puts some responsibility on the hobbyist to demonstrate that they aren't being gross polutors (again keep in mind that you may think you're only pouring a quart of solvent down the hole, but if all hobbyists do it, it's a big cumulative thing). Maybe a reasonable compromise is for the hobbyist to pass some sort of knowledge test to get a "minimal" use catagory license and be required to return a realistic amount of waste material to the same jobber they bought the original refinish material from to demonstrate they aren't generating the amount of polutants the politicians and environmental whackos think.

My concern in this is we lose reasonable freedom to misinformation and resultant misapplication of regulation. Just to give you an example from a volatile political issue in another venue. Something near 500 toddlers die per year by drowning in a few inches of water left in unattended 5 gallon plastic pails. Less than twenty children a year are killed by accidental discharge of firearms. Which one of those two gets the most focus? Rational or reactive?