> I personally think this current version of the legislation is a good compromise.

I don't think it is a good compromise. It seems to cover the wrong use cases.

My use cases have nothing to do with children on any level. Why would I want to submit to government restrictions? That makes zero sense.

It's as if the right-to-repair-movement would suddenly be undermined by a lobbyist advocating how restrictions are great. Or Jackie Chan suddenly praising the sinomarxist mono-party.

I'm sure than intelligent person like yourself understands that a lot of voters have kids and prioritize feeling that their kids are safe, even if those feelings are not always grounded in rationality. Most people shy away from complexity.