The Internet is furious that Las Vegas gunman Stephen Paddock isn't being described as a terrorist

In the wake of the deadliest mass shooting in American history, the FBI has claimed that no evidence exists linking now-dead shooter Stephen Paddock to international terrorist groups despite the Islamic State taking responsibility for his attack.

The distinction between Paddock's murderous violence and that of others who are labeled as terrorists, the Huffington Post reported, likely stems from a lack of federal statutes about mass shootings and ambiguity in the government's definition of the term "domestic terrorism."

Many have urged caution in jumping to label the Las Vegas attack terrorism, saying it's "too soon to tell" whether Paddock's motives were to instill terror.

Nonetheless, many others claim Paddock's attack appears to be a clear-cut example of domestic terrorism.

"This is the worst case scenario," Mark Kelly, a retired astronaut and husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), a shooting victim herself. "It's haunted our dreams, that we would wake up to news of a massacre like this. Weapons of war, in the hands of a determined killer with a tactical advantage."

"This was an ambush if there ever was one," Kelly continued. "This was domestic terrorism."

"This was an ambush if there ever was one," Mark Kelly says of Las Vegas attack. "This was domestic terrorism." https://t.co/27Sph9kNIZpic.twitter.com/YtfMhIaAid

— CBS News (@CBSNews) October 2, 2017

"White privilege is killing 50 and injuring 400 people and it not being labeled as domestic terrorism," one Twitter user wrote.

"This is exactly the right time to talk about gun violence," writer Charles Clymer tweeted in response to a Fox News host claiming the wake of the Mandalay Bay attack isn't a time to discuss gun laws. "It is exactly the right time to talk about domestic terrorism and its link to our gun laws."

Read some of the impassioned responses below.