While the Second Amendment is a non-partisan issue and there are liberals who oppose gun control, the truth of the matter is that the Democratic Party itself remains hostile toward gun ownership as a general rule. 

In fact, the last semi-pro-gun Democrat in the Senate, West Virginia's Joe Manchin, has left his party and is now an independent. There's really no one else on that side of the aisle who is at least hesitant to push gun control.

But over at the Washington Examiner, Zachary Faria figures the issue Democrats have is that they're chasing "shiny objects."

Senate Democrats attempted to push through a bump stock ban by unanimous consent, which predictably failed and will turn into yet another gun control talking point for the party. Why a bump stock ban, and why now? Because bump stocks are the shiny thing, with former President Donald Trump’s ban being found unconstitutional on Friday.

Are bump stocks, which exploit the recoil of a semiautomatic gun to allow users to simulate automatic gunfire, used prominently in gun crimes? Not really. But bump stocks were the shiny thing that Democrats clung to after the Las Vegas shooting in 2017, becoming yet another scary gun term that Democrats wanted to use as an excuse to crack down on law-abiding gun owners.

This is how gun control debates always go with the Democratic Party. If it isn’t bump stocks, it is a focus on “high-capacity magazines.” If not that, the focus goes to the vague and undefined characteristics of “assault weapons” or “expanded background checks.” If not that, there is always some “loophole” that is to blame. The proposals always would do next to nothing to stop criminals or shootings, and are always focused on making things more difficult or taking things away from law-abiding gun owners.

In other words, there is always some "thing" that is the problem, some item that is still available to the American people or some way to obtain a gun that is keeping their violence-free Utopia from coming to fruition and if we pass just one more law, then we can have peace and quiet...except that there's another thing that will be revealed after that and so on.

Faria is, of course, correct when he goes on to note that Democrats are pushing this instead of at least considering the possibility that the criminal justice reforms put forth by their allies back in 2019 and 2020 before the pandemic shut everything down might play a role.

It at least seems plausible if nothing else.

Yet Democrats will continue to always have one more law that needs to be passed. What's more, we've seen how this plays out time and time again.

A gun control group tries to argue that they just want a handful of what they call "common sense gun safety" measures. They lobby a state legislature to get them and succeed, so what do they do? They just trot out the next set of demands. They know that was just what they wanted then. They had no intention of stopping with the demands. They just want to move the needle more and more.

There will always be another law they want, though.

I have yet to have an anti-gunner tell me where the line is other than something like, "I don't want a total gun ban." Well, sure, but there's a lot of real estate between that and where we are now. Are they admitting that so long as one person can own a single, low-powered, single-shot firearm, they're good? Probably, but they won't say that. They want to be taken seriously and they want to pretend they're not really for gun bans.

But Democrats will keep finding another reason gun control doesn't work and they expect you to swallow it.