Now, the universal criminal background check is backed by more than 95 percent of the American people.

We are trying to keep them from getting guns in the first place.

I have yet to hear a single argument that this legislation in H.R. 8 is unconstitutional.

What harm is there in trying to figure out the link between guns and the violence and letting CDC and NIH study it?

Let me just remind this Committee of what I believe was a missed opportunity back in 1990.

Congress must do more to restrict access to these deadly devices, which includes ensuring that a teenager cannot easily purchase these exceptionally lethal firearms.

Elected officials on both sides of the aisle in State legislatures, Congress, and the White House agree we must raise the minimum age to purchase these weapons of war.

Let me be clear: there is no constitutional impediment to passing lifesaving gun laws.

Is it still too soon? Is it too soon to talk about taking action to stop gun violence?

Finally, Congress should Act to ban bump stocks.

The only thing standing in the way is the lack of political will.

I think that H.R. 8 is absolutely the right first step to closing this gaping loophole in background checks.

We are going to pass background checks because it is supported by over 90 percent of the American people, and it can help save a life.

Instead, I would urge my colleagues across the aisle to focus on enforcing the laws we already have.

If only one life is saved, that is enough for me. It darned well ought to be enough for every single Member of this Congress.

Stand up to gun corporations that control State legislatures and Washington to protect their profits and not protect American lives.

So please tell me what is the harm in studying it?

Dad, did you know there are loopholes in the Brady Bill?