All the talk about gun control on the news this morning. The one question not being answered is whether the guns the shooter possessed were possessed legally or not. If he had them illegally as in if they were owned by his brother who was originally blamed for the shooting gun laws are irrelevant. They wouldn’t have stopped him. Where is the answer to the one question that defines the argument that is sure to come? If the guns were obtained and or possessed illegally you probably won’t get one any time soon.
It’s my speculation that the original incorrect identification of the shooter was based on registration information on the weapons found on the scene. That would also account for the high level of attention that the brother is receiving. There may be culpability on his part by allowing access to the weapons. Mind you this is pure speculation. We have to wait to see how it plays out.
An update as I finished writing this post. The weapons were legally purchased and possessed by the shooters MOTHER. Now there’s a twist I didn’t see. That would still account for the attention to the brother as the next best source of information regarding the weapons.