That's a good example from recent history.
The perception was that bumpstocks were a loophole and once they came into the public eye, the limits were changed. In that case (at least so far) there has been very little "collateral damage".
I think it's reasonable to expect the same kind of thing from the 80% receiver situation. If it is pushed into the public eye and gets sufficient attention, there will probably be an attempt to change the limits of the law to eliminate what is perceived to be a loophole.
The perception was that bumpstocks were a loophole and once they came into the public eye, the limits were changed. In that case (at least so far) there has been very little "collateral damage".
I think it's reasonable to expect the same kind of thing from the 80% receiver situation. If it is pushed into the public eye and gets sufficient attention, there will probably be an attempt to change the limits of the law to eliminate what is perceived to be a loophole.