While most Democratic politicians have managed to bite their lip and refrain from trying to use the assassination attempt on Donald Trump for partisan purposes, we're already starting to see some pundits on the left use Saturday's deadly attack to call for bans on AR-15s and other so-called "assault weapons". 

The editorial board of the Philadelphia Inquirer saw the attempt on Trump's life as reason to swipe at Republicans over their opposition to a gun ban, as well as wringing their collective hands over the response to the assassination attempt by some Republican politicians. 

Assault weapons — which are designed to kill many people in a short period of time — have no place for recreational use by hunters. Trump could do a great service and save thousands of lives by joining the effort to ban these weapons and pass other sensible gun safety measures. 

No other developed country has such ease of access to guns. Or such a high tolerance for daily gun violence. Despite repeated high-profile shootings in schools, churches, theaters, grocery stores, and elsewhere across America, lawmakers repeatedly fail to meet the moment and act as if the killings are the price of freedom.

That is not the case. The assassination attempt on Trump is yet another opportunity to change the country’s deadly gun culture. Will voters demand change? Will lawmakers finally come together or talk past one another?

Just a few days ago Democrats were hailing (and taking credit for) the plummeting violent crime rates that are being reported in many cities. But it doesn't matter how low the crime rate drops or how fast it falls; it will never get to zero, and gun control fans like those on the Inquirer editorial board will always be able to point to some heinous crime as evidence for the need for more restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms. 

But I suspect the editors will get soon get the response they're looking for, at least from Democrats in Congress and the Pennsylvania legislature and albeit after keeping their mouths mostly shut about a legislative response for a short period of time. Gov. Josh Shapiro has been a longtime supporter of gun control, and though he's been pushing more for "red flag" laws and "universal" background checks as of late, demanding a ban on "assault weapons" is right in line with his ideology. 

Sadly, the demand to disarm tens of millions of responsible gun owners wasn't even the worst part of the Inquirer editorial. The paper chided Sen. J.D. Vance for saying that "the central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs,” adding, "that rhetoric led directly to President Trump’s attempted assassination.” 

Now, we may not officially know why the cowardly assassin tried to kill Donald Trump yet, but it's absolutely true that the entire premise of the Biden campaign is that Trump represents an authoritarian and existential threat to the United States.  But the Inquirer essentially adopts that very argument, citing some of Trump's most incendiary comments as evidence, before abruptly trying to sound a note of bipartisan deescalation in conclusion. 

This Editorial Board does not agree with Trump on most of his policy positions and actions, let alone his divisive style, criminality, and penchant for spreading lies. We believe he remains a danger to democracy.

But we wish him no harm and hope something good can come from this latest act of gun violence. A sound first step would be for Trump and Biden to stand together and denounce the heated rhetoric and false conspiracy theories.

"We believe he's a threat to democracy but we don't wish him any harm" is a very thin line, and the problem for the Inquirer is that many of their readers on the left do wish Donald Trump harm. I've seen some disgusting comments on social media, as I'm sure you have as well. It wasn't just the immediate impulse to label the shooting a false flag operation. I've seen dozens of responses whose only sadness or remorse about the assassination attempt is their fear that it will make Trump more electable. The left has dehumanized Donald Trump, and based on what I've seen on social media, some of them have lost touch with an important part of their own humanity in the process.

The hot takes have come from the entirety of the political spectrum, but the Inquirer ignores the fact that there really are only a few examples of outrageous commentary in response to the assassination attempt to point to; outside of people looking for attention on social media, anyway. If the Inquirer editors would like this moment to lead to us taking a couple of collective steps back from the precipice of political warfare, they' should quit lecturing Republicans about their supposed failures, and or at least take more than a cursory look at their own party as well . 

If you want Americans to come together, you don't call for taking away tens of millions of their legally owned guns, or banning their sale and possession going forward. That would be one of the single most divisive actions Congress could take at the moment. You don't present a one-sided account of the ugliness of American politics that refuses to hold your own side to account, especially when your side is losing the state of Pennsylvania to Trump. 

If the Inquirer editors are serious about coming together they should be listening right now instead of lecturing, or at least offering up something that isn't just a variation on their standard "Republicans suck" theme. I hope that this is a moment where we can collectively cool down just a little, but I'm not convinced the editors eager to use Saturday's shooting to advance their long-held anti-gun ideology really feel the same way,