Sunday's attack, now considered the deadliest mass shooting in recent US history, has renewed calls from many Democrats urging stricter gun control.
According to reports, House Democrats will gather to protest against Republican inaction on gun control on Wednesday following the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history. Many firearms advocates - but not all - are opposed to even the most basic gun control legislation, as they view that as a slippery slope that would eventually result in infringement on their constitutional rights.
"I don't see Trump or Republicans in general pushing for gun control", Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Darrell West told Xinhua.
Snyder added that there's no federal law requiring notification of the ATF for a purchase of multiple rifles. What is going to happen is Democrats are trying to push for this poison pill. Ninety-nine per cent of the time, they are used lawfully. Those are real costs.
"To those who say we can't talk about machine gun massacres right after the massacre: I'm done waiting for the "right time" to talk about it".
We should discuss why some experts who have examined gun violence data the most, domestically and overseas, now conclude that more gun control isn't necessarily the answer to curbing the violence.
But Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri said her party should be careful not to push too hard.
"It's an entertainment industry, it's an entertainment town and you get a lot of people from a lot of places that don't have this kind of entertainment", Grant said. Elizabeth Warren from MA. "We had local people here who had family and friends injured or killed".
Bills toughening gun laws have repeatedly stalled in Congress for many years.
CT state Sen. Joe Markley, who is now running for lieutenant governor, opposes Murphy's gun control agenda and told TheDCNF that it's ill advised to assume the government can fix this problem. As for background checks, several Nevada gun shops have told the press that Paddock passed all requisite checks, and he appears to have no history that would have flagged him under a more stringent background system. The common argument from this side of the aisle is that more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens would provide more protection. "It's simply intellectually dishonest". Next, they're tricky to obtain legally due to existing gun laws. A ban here, a background check there, and, voila, no more mass shootings. That, coupled with the erosion of spirituality have created a recipe for disaster. Why do we have to live in a world like this? The stocks have been around for less than a decade, and Schneider said officials determined they were legal.
"If it comes over from the Senate, I'm willing to look at whatever legislation they think might be prudent", said Representative Mark Meadows, chairman of the conservative Freedom Caucus in the House.
The NRA gave its biggest support ever, $30m, to Donald Trump's campaign.