Especially when it's buried in a new 400 page bill, it wouldn't be hard at all. And if's nothing new, why is it necessary to rewrite it? Did the other law sunset?
Today's compromise is the path to tomorrow's surrender. Pass a clean bill or don't pass it at all.
How hard would it be to go from the way it is written now to this:
"Under current law (18 USC Sec. 921(a)(17)(B)), ammunition is only "armor piercing" if it has a bullet that "may be used in a firearm handgun, firearm" and that is made entirely from certain hard metals such as tungsten, steel, bronze or depleted uranium; or if the bullet is "designed and intended for use in a handgun" and has a jacket that weighs more than 25% of the weight of the projectile."
Especially when it's buried in a new 400 page bill, it wouldn't be hard at all. And if's nothing new, why is it necessary to rewrite it? Did the other law sunset?
Today's compromise is the path to tomorrow's surrender.
Pass a clean bill or don't pass it at all.