PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 21, 1995
Saving Police Officers' Lives Act of 1995 - Amends Federal criminal code firearms provisions to expand the definition of "armor piercing ammunition" to include a projectile that may be used in a handgun that the Secretary of the Treasury determines to be capable of penetrating body armor. Directs the Secretary to make such determination in accordance with regulations that provide for the uniform testing of projectiles against the Body Armor Exemplar based on standards developed in consultation with representatives of selected Federal, State, county, and local law enforcement agencies. Authorizes the Secretary to promulgate regulations to carry out the intent of this Act upon finding that any ammunition, the manufacture or importation of which would be prohibited under such regulation, serves no substantial sporting purpose and serves primarily to kill human beings, subject to specified consultation requirements. Prohibits such a regulation from taking effect until ten days after it is published in the Federal Register and delivered to the Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY-9] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2386 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2386 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2386 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2386 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.