What is meant by the term holistic play?

Why do people use the term "loophole" when discussing the law or issues? I've found that the use of the term "loophole" is misleading as it implies conduct is occurring that the law was meant to stop and is happening anyway due to poor drafting.

• In US law, conduct is by default legal unless otherwise proscribed by law.  When defined in law, it either defaults to conduct that as legal and lists exceptions that are proscribed or proscribe all conduct and lists the exceptions that are legal.  I believe most people believe the law is written as the latter when in many cases, the law is the former or non-existent. So why do people use the term "loophole"?  I've generally found the term is used to describe conduct the speaker believes should be illegal but isn't.  Thoughts?

• Answer:

  I think "loophole" is sometimes used the way you describe.  But I think it is also used to describe an unintended result of statutory construction. In other words, a legislature passes a law intending to proscribe a certain set of conduct, but unintentionally left out or added language that -- in practice -- resulted in people being free to do something legislature intended to prohibit.  For example, if a state legislature wrote a statute which read: "No person, while operating a motor vehicle in this state, shall use his cellular telephone to send or receive text messages, social media messages, or phone calls without the use of a hands-free device."  This statute might technically leave open the possibility that one could use their phone to send and receive emails while operating a motor vehicle.  But the legislature most likely intended that to be illegal as well.  Thus, a "loophole."  They've covered many bases all around the 'outside' of the issue, but there is a big "hole" right in the middle for people to go through.  It's important to also add to this discussion that a loophole is not always a loophole.  If a person simply reads the text of a law or statute -- such as the example I've cited above -- and believes they "know" the law and the loopholes, they could be very wrong.  In the US, law is a combination of the statutes passed by legislatures, and caselaw as developed by judges interpreting those statutes.  So if Judges in my fictitious state above have interpreted my example statute's prohibition against sending or receiving "text messages" to also include email messages and any message involving the use of the phone's keyboard, then that WILL be illegal, and will NOT be a "loophole" in the law, even though the text of the statute itself seems to leave open that possibility.  So the law is not always exactly what it seems.