The point here is to gain votes by making the general public feeling safer.
Excellent, we are on the same page. These initiatives do nothing to actually increase safety, the idiots the politicians pander to only think they do.
I have no practical instant solution, home chemist numbers are far too small for the victories that have been achieved by similarly-discriminated against groups. Groups that have successfully pushed back ineffective, feel good, legislation usually have around 10% representation in the population, with only a fraction of them politically active. Home chemists are far far less than 1% of the population.
But based on what I have observed speaking to political fighters that have been with their respective fights 'since the beginning' of their effectual lobbying, is to get everyone affected on the same page, to create a larger support base for effective lobbying. This means convincing all chemists that useless regulation starts with individuals, but chemophobia spreads into 'real labs', which of course it does. Then working with amateur biologists, physicists, general tinkerers and much of the DIY groups, we would have a larger lobby, hopefully extending throughout the science community.
Then we are a political force, and it costs more votes than a politician would gain by creating such ineffective, feel good legislation. Even if the vote ratio would not work out in our favour, actual contact with politicians is a good way be heard. There is no organized 'anti-home-chemistry' lobby, so with numbers it would be relatively easy to have 50 different people mail, or show up in a politician's office, with no one on the opposing side. A feign of vote force that I have seen work Extremely
well in other circles.