This law  imposes a burden on retailers and customers totally disproportionate to any foreseeable benefits. Persons buying these products must provide a valid driver's license or other government issued ID showing the person's name, date of birth and photograph. The purchaser must also sign a log documenting their name and address, the date and time of the transaction, and the brand, product name and net weight of the item. So do retailers need to take and file a copy of the valid ID? How do retailers know an ID is valid? Is a signed copy of the invoice with the person's name and address, the date and time of the transaction, and the product SKU and description enough, or does this information need to be transferred to a log?  And this all has to happen while other customers wait in line...

     Retailers must decide which products are covered by this law. The law says that the products covered by this law ""are required to contain the words "causes severe burns" as the affirmative statement of principal hazard on its label."" I do not know what the "affirmative statement of principal hazard" means. The following are directly from products in the store. Does the label warning "DANGER corrosive, causes severe burns" qualify? It would seem to qualify, but isn't "corrosive" the primary hazard listed, and "causes severe burns" a secondary hazard? What about "POISON. HARMFUL OR FATAL IF SWALLOWED. CAUSES SEVERE BURNS ON CONTACT." Is the "if swallowed" the primary hazard, and "causes severe burns" a secondary hazard? What about "DANGER. CAUSES BURNS."? What about "DANGER: can cause burns on contact."? What about "DANGER. causes eye, skin and mucous membrane burns."? And if I don't include something, am I going to get fined? Sued by some ambitious lawyer?

     Is this law really going to accomplish anything? The law was prompted by a tragedy where a woman was severely burned a woman who threw caustic acid at her. The woman was caught and sentenced to 44 years in prison. Let's assume this happens again. Now the police have the option of canvassing (tens of?) thousands of  retailers across Illinois requesting the logs for (hundreds of ?) thousands of transactions where the product was sold in the last week? Month? Year? All this so the police can interview the multi-thousands of purchasers of the product used in the assault? Do the police really have the resources to do this - even if this was the best approach to solving the crime?

     The law is so poorly written and thought out that I am embarrassed for the lawmakers who voted for it. Did they read it before they approved it? Did they use any common sense in thinking through the consequences? PLEASE VOTE TO REPEAL THIS LAW IMMEDIATELY.

    The full text of the law can be seen on http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=09700HB2193&GA=97&SessionId=84&DocTypeId=HB&LegID=59416&DocNum=2193&GAID=11&Session=