*laughs in 1776*
Firearms do, in fact, impact the power of the people to influence the government. Because an armed population cannot be governed without its consent. This sets some basic outer bounds on any sensible government. Of course, then you get politicians who aren't sensible running things and they eventually run into why it is that armed populations need consent to be governed.
Or get replaced by politicians closer to sensible before this breaking point is reached. Either or. Very preferably the latter, as civil wars tend to gut a country for a while.
Ballot box, soap box, jury box, ammo box, in that order.
Virtual all political decisions with be decided by the first two, and the rest will be dealt with by courts. I cannot recall a time in my life where public access to firearms posed any meaningful impediment to government policy. They're only useful in extreme circumstances, circumstances that politicians do not factor into thier decisions.
Chuck Schumer is clearly not worried about his court packing scheme getting literally shot down, along with him, for example.