Where a law is "aimed," just like a firearm, has no bearing on where it eventually "strikes." Just like collateral damage in war, much damage can result from a confusing, poorly written statute that gets prostituted later for some other environmental/political purpose by the agency charged with its enforcement. The Law of Unintended Consequences is still in force, and just because someone now says they don't intend the law to cover sporrans does not mean someone else will not interpret it differently.

I am especially suspicious of the statements that noone seems to know exactly what is intended, but it's only to bring the law in line with the European Union. There you have your legal system being run by someone not answerable to your own citizens.