Illinois last week enacted a broad gun control proposal. Advocates for gun owners’ rights already have a lawsuit against the measure, as they should.

We are skeptical that the law’s definition of “assault weapon” — always a nebulous term without a precise, preordained meaning — is narrow enough to truly pass muster.

We are skeptical that the limits on magazine capacity are limited enough in scope to only effect the use of “assault weapons.” Gun shop owners in Illinois told 25 News Now in East Peoria that under the law some standard-issue clips will be illegal. Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, estimates that the impact will be felt by 80 percent of Illinois gun owners.

The law also includes requirements to register firearms and pay registration fees, in a move frankly reminiscent of poll taxes but for the Second Amendment rights.

“The right to keep and bear arms for defense of life, liberty and property, is regarded as an unalienable right of the people,” McLean County, Illinois, Sheriff Matt Lane. “If the intent of the legislative branch of this state is to change the U.S. Constitution, there is a process that was created long ago to accomplish such a change.”

We agree that such strident limitations on Americans’ right to self-defense would require amending the Constitution. We further caution supporters of such measures that it likely isn’t just the Second Amendment, as important as it is.

For the goals of the gun-control lobby to actually be effective, we suspect that our cherished civil liberties would have to be greatly eroded. Our right to due process and to be safe from searches and seizures absent a warrant would be clear obstacles to the success of any prohibitionist approach to guns — as other prohibitionist approaches to alcohol and narcotics have repeatedly demonstrated.

We hope that court challenges can curb the excesses of this new law, and serve as a deterrent from such intrusive laws being pursued in Pennsylvania and elsewhere.