yep the government is not the people, they are just elected to represent the people and as with every system it can be hacked by money and power
group of anarchists? nope they were separatists completely different thing
anarchists don't want to create a nation as far as i know

do you know who didn't have their own weapons when they needed them? the jews and other minorities during nazi rule
did the government defend them ? nope exactly the opposite
i bet they would have defended themselves if they had weapons

And if the government isn't altruistic? They are representative of the people and elected by the people. They, however do not always act in the interest of the people. Without cheques and balances, nothing stops the federal government from overstepping its authorities (tyranny in the words of the second amendment). The militias were to be a balance against the federal government. Since the modern militias a little more than arms of the federal government, it is imperative that the people be able to protect themselves from a tyrannical overstep by the government. No, not every exercise of authority or overreach is tyranny, but eventually they will lead to such if the government is not held in check by the people.

I think we should get a little closer to topic though and talk about limp noodle lawmakers smashing their heads into the brick wall that is censorship of video games in the face of the first amendment.

Yesterday I refused to bite, chiefly because this is so ridiculous, and the lawmaker must be living in a bubble and not done any research ... just had some dumb emotional idea, without understanding anything about the whole concept, and I don't think we should give them the time of day ... not even worthy of discussing ... but seeing as some of you have ....

So let me sum it up - Impossible, can't happen, won't happen.

What we would have left, would be a bunch of simple kid games, which would only please some kids and dumb parents.

And if you could do that to games, then why stop there, why not books and movies and TV Series, etc.

So ludicrous in the extreme, and anyone who has thought it through for more than 5 seconds knows this.
So this is just some stunt.

Hey, the totalitarians of yesterday are totally different from the ones today! See!? See!?

No, contrarily, i believe this side-rail we're on is actually the big picture, and the underlying true topic, but we've not arrived at it, yet, actually. See below...

Ridiculous to you, but not to everyone. In fact, your "failure to see the truth" is viewed as ridiculous to those people. Here's a stupid little thing observation that i found online one time that i can't find right now. When playing skyrim, did you know that people from urban and sub-urban areas have a tendency to prefer the imperials in the war? Meanwhile, people in rural areas tend to prefer the stormcloaks? I wish i could find the article, because, despite the person being of completely opposite views as me, he quite clearly identified the obvious source behind our current culture war: people who live in close proximity to other people in largely metropolitan areas have this tendancy to view and understand each other as incompetent, and in need of competent experts to rule. Meanwhile, people in farm lands and frontiers have little government assistance, understand that in order to survive, you have to be more competent than the "experts," because the experts are all theory and no practice. The left views the stormcloaks as rebels who fail to understand the bigger picture of making sacrifices in favor of slowly undermining the aldmeri dominion (the Altmer are the implicit bad guys among mortals), with Ulfric being a Nazi, more or less. The right, on the other hand, views the imperials as unwitting tools of the aldmeri dominion, willing to sacrifice that which is more important to the nords in favor of gaining peace for everyone who is not a nord, that the nords are worth sacrificing on the alter of peace in the eyes of the empire, and thus fighting to prevent this sacrifice in culture is noble. The connection is, the left sees the imperials as experts running a successful campaign of subterfuge, while the right sees the imperials as incompetent pawns (and the fact that the Thalmor are kidnapping and executing nords for Talos worship in Nordic territory really doesn't help things). It should also be noticed that the fact the nords are genuinely oppressed on racial and religious grounds has no weight to the left, which some might expect, but does on the right, which those same people would not expect.

What we're missing is the fundamental big picture cultural difference between the urban and the rural areas. Which areas are more likely to wear masks? Which areas trust governments to be able to enforce these laws? The difference is palpable, and I don't think we really appreciate the fact that the fundamental gap between the two cultures may very well be irreconcilable.

EDIT: To be clear, the reason for this is that our government officials make no attempts to separate the laws, and the urban areas need their government oversight while the rural areas need the government to spend some proverbial time with itself somewhere away from the rural areas.

Guys...

It's just a matter of time. The thing is... it already happened and the vast majority of gamers barely noticed, still supporting abusive companies.

Microtransactions,
Loot boxes,
[lack of] technical support,
Online only gaming[right now I'm watching Ross' on this matter, having actually contacted him so we may discuss some ideas youtubeDOTcom/watch?v=T2pdvh4uiaM],
Intrusive and/or openly harmful DRM,
Broken releases,
Purposely incomplete content,
Insecure handling of personal info
and so on.

We already have plenty of problems to worry about and the facts do prove it - gamers will not worry about!

For the last 3 years I campaigned in order to raise an institute so we could cooperatively support each other's needs [yes, that's BEFORE the COVID] as long as engrossing interest on various aspects of Life that are miserably deranging into craziness at the expense of our jobs, our security, our mental health, our relationships, our FUTURE. Guess what? I'm broken, barely alone, and thinking seriously on how this scenario was EARNED for years of lack of interest from our society.

...all made for our own goodness, of course! All designed by "people" [in quotes because in my book PEOPLE should not count PSYCHOPATHS] who are actually the religious leaders, the political representatives, the legal experts, the usual suspects - who are all doing their thing with no worries at all, thank you.

The answers I expect from this? The usual, improductive rant, internet angry, or the default "I don't care, let's shop as usual!".

Yet I'm still open for discussions - the productive ones, I mean.
While I'm here.

I opened GOG's forums on my phone, and I read this as "lawnmower".... :))

The problem, imo, is that life is too "easy" these days(in the first world, I mean) for a good number of people, so actually solving the underlying issues that really cause the problems blamed on things like video games and etc is seemingly "too big" (bothersome) a task for most.

It's the same reason people post text and pics on social media or donate a few bucks at a store checkout and then go on with their lives....many are used to easy(and cheap) solutions for things, partly due to how the (first) world is these days, and(even if they have the means/skill) most will avoid inconveniencing themselves too much to solve such problems.

(I should know, sadly being near as lazy as others in some such regards)

Also some issues have some very "iffy" causes at the core of them that some would not like to admit to, I wager.
(in some cases because it might go against their held beliefs, and in others because it would likely be "unwise" in today's "being quick to get offended" era to point out some of the true underlying causes some issues in todays world)

So what do people often choose to do?

Usually they blame things like video games, complain a bit online/IRL(maybe get a petition going for awhile), and then call it a day.

In order to actually start tackling some of those issues, people would need to want to do things that take a bit more effort and admit to some possibly hard to swallow truths.

Now will they do so, if ever? That is hard to say.....but it won't get anywhere until people take/make that first step.

Read my previous post, right here.

How is this institute faring right now? Does it exist, and how much power do you have in it? Because if you want, the solution to this problem isn't actually all that hard. I'm working on my own, but i'm willing to pass on my theory, as the more of us who haveit, the better off we'll be.

As for how it was earned, that's obvious: escapism. We thought that if we simply keep our mouths shut and avoid problems, rather than face them, the problems will stay put and shit like gamergate would never happen. But that's the fundamental problem: the nature of politics is all-consuming, so that everything becomes political, since it is about people telling other people what they should and should not be able to choose. Naturally that's going to include the safe-spaces we call "games" that we retreat to. The more we try to pretend that we can just avoid the problem, the deeper the problem will entrench itself. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Instead of games like that, we're seeing more that involve themselves with contemporary politics, because the powers that be thought we didn't get the messages 'cause they weren't clear enough (or so they thought). Instead, we understood the messages they wanted us to hear better than they themselves did. Our games warned us of tyrants, yet now that the makers are the tyrants, they want us to bow down to them, because they expected us to interpret their messages and come to the same conclusions they did. Why did they get this notion? Because we hid like cowards instead of discussing the themes openly. They have no feedback, and now it's getting worse.

Actually, a more important question is, how the hell did we get to the point that we hid and cowered in our games? Why didn't we take the personal responsibility to say no to these practices?

As I said above: a good number of people don't want to expend too much effort or resources to solve problems...especially if they would inconvenience said people too much(time/resources needed), or would likely negatively affect the one doing so.
(chastisement/shunning/etc by others online/IRL....leading to things like losing one's job or social standing, for example)

Things like starting a petition, venting online, or giving a few bucks to some cause.....these are easier to do and give people some quick validation...and often allow them to push the issue aside for a bit longer(or to make it someone else's problem to solve).

It's likely similar reasoning to why these officials push these video game/etc bills....they make it look like they are doing something, when in reality they aren't doing much of anything, and the true problems seem to just stay unsolved more often than not.

In part, it's down to three words: Bread and circus
(i.e. an easy life for some)

I used to think that, too, but these people seem to have visions of grandeur. I also don't believe they honestly hold these opinions, either. Now, yeah, low IQ people are going to speak the talking points as always, expecting someone to solve the problems for them. But, let's be honest, it's clear the higher ups very much just don't like the idea of us being just as happy as them. They can't stand that they drink the same coke that i drink, so to speak. They don't like us surfs having the same opportunities as them. There's something to be said about this, but virtue signalling is far more common. It's all about saying you stand for something, even if you're not actually willing to commit to the cause. Look at Bill Gates and his climate change stance. yeah, i remember talking to a communist from Slovenia who went under the pseudonym "Wolfy." He told me, when i was asking him questions about chemistry, that he didn't actually believe CO2 lead to a rise in global temperatures, and he also showed science to suggest as much, as well as some simple math principles that verified s much. His explanation was that he believe that CO2 concentrations, however, caused violence, but he knew no one would ever publicly agree with this conclusions. I also remember the last time him and I talked, he was chewing out my girlfriend and my town for having manditory leash laws, on a post where my girlfriend was pointing out that they need to be stricter, because there was almost 2 dead dogs, because there wasn't adequate enforcement of the existing leash law. Wolfy said that it was unfair to the animals to leash them up, and here's my poor girlfriend freaking out in the original post that her dog almost had to fight off a very tiny and aggressive dog (the dog later came after me, and i saw first hand what the problem was: the dog's leash was so long s/he was able to reach, not just the sidewalk, but also the edge of the road), which would have possibly resulted in her dog being killed by some obscure law (i don't think it would've applied in this case) where they put down aggressive dogs (usually it only applies when these dogs attack people). Fortunately, she was able to hold her own dog back, but just barely, and almost got run over by a car in the process (they had to flee into the street to avoid the confrontation, which was a main road, but fortunately it's a small town of only about 9000 people). It was at that point I finally blocked Wolfy for sophistry. I couldn't understand why he felt that that post was an appropriate post to virtue signal "animal rights" on. Yeah, this, precisely. I remember when my girlfriend's coworker got stabbed to death by her husband. Suddenly things went from "murder is bad" to "oh my god, i can't believe this happened near me. How could something like this happen here?" I mean, i pointed out that it happened around here all the time, and no one cared until it was something they themselves personally knew. You see, when people virtue signal, it's almost never about issues that they have any personal experience with. I mean, common, lately the offense crowd has been notorious for being offended on behalf of people who aren't actually offended. How many people were offended over the great Count Dankula's "nazi pug video" and how many of them were actually jews? And did not a bunch of jews get together to help fund his legal defense?
Yeah, they're offended and outraged on behalf of someone else. They're not genuinely concerned about the issue, or they'd spend much, much more effort. It's like the people who come to me saying they want to learn programming, but then can't be bothered to learn things like hex-decimal or binary. Oh no, the concept of assignment is too difficult and burdensome. Frankly, i'm sick of wasting my time on these "students."

The lawyers will never let that happen

Well said

(would get into the rest, but I either can't find the right words atm or it might go against tos)

what do they need those for?

The most important things created in the american revolution or in the french revolution later exported to all liberal democracies were the sepaparation of three powers and that is and was what effectivelly controls the unbalance risk of tyranny from the executive power etc. Not an uncontroled right to bear arms for all. The legislations and the society and the country itself is much more complex today that in 1800.
The fact is that the second ammendment does not want to be contextualized at all. And it is the ammmendment most affected by its historical reality and context.

-------------

And about the OP itself it reminds me old 1990 when religious sectors and ultraconservative wing sectors tried to ban videogames as well, or movies. etc.

As a whole they where the same who were extreme defenders of the second ammendsment "as is", whitout any control.

“We all declare for Liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleased with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men’s labor.”

Abraham Lincoln

Change "product of his labour" with "his liberty to watch and play any videogame" and the famous quote will fit well.