What about the gun show loophole? "Report back to me and see if that was the problem here," said Graham. "This kid accessed weapons that were lawfully purchased by his mother, right? That doesn't seem to be the problem here."which makes little sense. the gun show loophole already exists. if nancy lanza purchased the firearms used in her son's attack legally, that doesn't mean they weren't legal because of the loophole. taking advantage of a loophole can make otherwise unlawful things legal. that's what makes it a loophole.
not that i have any idea if ms. lanza purchased any of her guns at a gun show and whether or not those purchases may have only been legal because of the gun show loophole. all i'm saying is that senator graham is not making sense.
(also what difference does it make if closing the gun show loophole would have prevented last friday's incident? even if it had nothing to do with that attack, the weird legal loophole in which gun purchases at gun shows are not subject to the same background checks as guns purchases at stores exists. either there's some good reason for that loophole, or there isn't. if there isn't, the loophole should be closed, even if the loophole played no role in the most recent gun massacre)
