Early Monday morning, investigators say Stephen Paddock rained deadly gunfire from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas killing nearly 60 people and injuring hundreds more using assault rifles with high-capacity magazines.

Once again, it's sparked debate and has lawmakers wondering if a ban on those type magazines could have prevented mass casualties. Some magazines can hold as little as 10 rounds, and in extreme cases, drum magazines can hold more than 100 rounds.

LATEST | Las Vegas shooting: All but 3 victims identified

RELATED | Is it possible the Vegas shooter's gun was an automatic weapon?

VOTE | Is there any reason for a civilian to have a high-capacity magazine weapon?

But one local gun store owner argues that lawmakers are missing the mark and that its not the weapons but the criminals.

"I don't think we're focusing on the right thing. I don't think the size of the magazine or the capacity of the magazine is really the focus," said Ken Baye, COO of Stoddard's Range and Guns. "I think that bad people do bad things with whatever tools they have. Whether some one is driving a truck in a pedestrian area in London or Paris or putting a bomb in a truck and driving it into a building...bad people find a way to do bad things."

MORE | Georgia gun laws lenient, but restrict automatic weapons

However, many lawmakers and even some experts in the law enforcement community believe high-capacity magazines can be an invitation to cause destruction. Take it from the very man who had to respond to Monday morning's deadly mass shooting.

In December, Clark County Sheriff Lombardo was quoted in an op-ed in the Las Vegas Sun saying, "I’m a very avid hunter, I was in the military myself, and there’s no need to have a high-capacity magazine for any practical reason."

Despite that, the issue is likely to remain a contentious topic as leaders try to grapple with how to prevent future mass shootings.