I've known many people who could be referred to as a "hot mess" in my life, and I've seen a lot of things that fit that description as well. That includes quite a few laws pushed onto the American people by Democrats.
However, advocates are using the term to describe the mandatory gun storage law in Illinois. That's saying something, especially when you consider Illinois in general. It takes something extra to be a hot mess there.
And yet, the state managed to nail it, apparently:
Efforts are under way by gun control groups to enhance Illinois’ gun storage and lost and stolen reporting laws. A gun rights group says the proposals are a “hot mess.”
Illinois legislators return for fall veto session the week after the Nov. 5 election.
In a news release, the Gun Violence Prevention PAC, G-PAC, said when legislators are in session, they should act on a package of bills making gun storage and lost and stolen reporting laws more strict.
“The Safe At Home legislation will address the sobering realities that today, there are more guns in our country than people, and every one in three children lives in a home with a gun,” a statement from G-PAC President and CEO Kathleen Sances says. “There is mounting evidence that the risk of unintentional shootings, mass shootings and suicide can be significantly reduced if we make simple changes in our laws to keep us all Safe At Home.”
...
Illinois State Rifle Association lobbyist Ed Sullivan said the proposal also requires firearms be locked up if there are any “prohibited persons” in the residence.
“Anybody in the state of Illinois that does not have a [Firearm Owner’s ID] card is a prohibited person,” Sullivan told The Center Square. “And so there’s over 10 million people that are prohibited persons [in Illinois]. There’s no criminal damage. They're not criminals. They’re not mentally challenged. They just don’t have a FOID card.”
Yeah, that's kind of a problem.
Of course, Illinois lawmakers will see that as a feature, not a bug. They'll also try to argue in court that it doesn't count as a prohibition simply because everyone in the house could, theoretically, get a FOID card or something equally stupid.
Sullivan notes that there are measures under consideration that could be used instead, such as a bill that would provide tax credits for buying gun safes. People who buy them are those inclined to use them but don't already have them. That means more guns would be safely secured when not in use, but it wouldn't involve the state trying to roll in and tell people what "in use" really means.
Plus, it's like they didn't even read the Bruen decision.
Unless they already know of a historical analog for a law like this – spoiler: There isn't one – then it's just a matter of time before the courts toss it out anyway. While that would be hilarious, a lot of people will be hurt before then.
Guns should be safely stored when not in use, but a state like Illinois isn't going to leave anything to chance. You will not have access to your gun, and they're just bound and determined that it'll be your fault, at least when the court cases pop up.