H.R.2814/S.1338, Repeals the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, and provides for the discoverability and admissibility of gun trace information in civil proceedings has been introduced in Congress with co-sponsors Congressman Carolyn Maloney (D-12), Tom Suozzi (D-3) and Ritchie Torres (D-15) in the House and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand in the Senate.

My shocked face:

Of course they did. "This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products - a protection granted to no other industry." - Joe Biden (on his website). Oh wait... "Hello Vaccine Manufacturers" (to name one of several other industries)

I find it strange how fiercely divided our Government really is, and how radically different the Legislation from the two Parties are, and while this division is happening, another one is brewing, one not seen here since circa 1860.  

Not me. I turn 59 this year and have really only been following politics since around 1978 when I was in High School. I have this exact conversation from time to time with younger people who pretty much say the same thing and wonder what is going on. The simplest explanation I have is "democracy". My elderly mother recalls back when she was young how my grandparents would watch the conventions on TV and how exciting it was. Often you did not know who the candidates were going to be going in (much like who will be Pope). It was the smoked filled room with party bosses that pretty much hammered out the deals that lead to selecting candidates (sometimes with huge brawls like the DNC convention in Chicago in 1968). The primaries that there were did not seem to have the kind of influence that they did starting in 1980. For all the downsides to having insiders choosing candidates, they were somewhat pragmatic in maintaining something of a balance in their choices that really lead to bipartisanship. When the primaries became the major influence, it became the party "wing nuts" who chose the candidates and they tend to be far more left or right than the average voter. They are the ones who tend take the time out to vote in primaries. Just look at how few people actually voted in the primary that allowed AOC to replace the long time Democrat in that district. It was only a fraction of the registered Democrat's who bothered to vote in the primary.

So now you have the far left putting people like AOC in office and the far right putting people like Marjorie Taylor Greene in office. Can you image those two coming together on any legislation? The few somewhat moderate office holders still around often face primaries on the left from candidates supported by groups like Justice Democrats and on the right from whoever is filling in for the Tea Party these days. The candidates that push the farthest to the left or right are the ones these days who get the nomination. And they are never in a mood to cross the aisle to look for common interests.

In regards to your last paragraph: being considerably younger I would say that I can't really name any legislation that "crossed the aisle" which was of any real benefit to me or a common citizen.

Everytime "legislation" passes, it is synonymous with "regulation."

The asshats in DC can't be trusted to regulate anything with my best interest in mind. That's precisely why I don't trust a politician in general and when someone tells me "this guy is one of the good guys" I usually laugh and say "not for long he isn't!"

Part of that is that most bills introduced these days are extremely partisan and not worthy of support. Each bill generally paying homage to the benefactors who put the politicians in office. The days of building a better nation for the common good are long long gone.  The current Democrat "Infrastructure Bill" is a prime example. Most of it is nothing but garbage but it needs to be put forward in order to reward the people who supported the current crop of Democrat candidates. Of course the Republicans are screaming how wasteful it is and spends little on "infrastructure". Of course that is because they did not write it and it does not reward their constituents with largess. If the roles were reversed and it was the Republicans running Congress, the bill would be just as large but would be spending on Republican priorities. The Democrats would naturally be screaming for reduced spending (highly unlikely) or demanding that spending be doubled to include their pet projects (most likely).

Either way, I learned long ago that Republicans and Democrats are different sides of the same coin. Or my baseball analogy where it is really "Major League Government" (like MLB) with the Republican League and the Democrat League (AL and NL). They have interleague battles but heaven help any outsider that tries to crash the monopoly and start a third league. They will act as one and crush the outsider.

This is fair. I won't argue this point