Gun-Ban Group Wants AR-15s Judged by a Muzzle Energy Formula
An anti-gun group called CRIME wants the U.S. Supreme Court to ban the AR-15 and most other semi-automatic rifles using a formula it invented. The group filed its amicus brief on October 28, 2026, the deadline for briefs supporting the assault weapon bans in Cook County, Illinois, and Connecticut. CRIME stands for "Citizens' Response to Increased Muzzle Energy." Its brief asks the justices to replace the Second Amendment's "common use" test with a calculation called Measure of Muzzle Energy per Minute, or MEpM. The brief claims the AR-15 places "an exponentially-higher amount of firepower" in one person's hands than any other firearm. Under CRIME's math, that is enough to strip constitutional protection.
Key Details
The brief lays out a simple formula and a set of comparisons. Here are the core facts:
- Filing date: October 28, 2026, the deadline for amicus briefs supporting the Cook County and Connecticut bans.
- Group: CRIME, "Citizens' Response to Increased Muzzle Energy."
- Formula: MEpM equals muzzle energy per shot multiplied by rounds fired per minute.
- Dirty Harry comparison: The brief says eight Inspector Callahans, each firing a 6-shot .44 Magnum three times a minute, equal one shooter with a 30-round rifle over the same minute. That totals 144 rounds.
- Rifle figure: The brief assigns the M1 Garand, which it calls a "mid-range AR-15 archetype," 85,219 foot-pounds per minute of MEpM.
- Estimates: The brief's appendix concedes that most rate-of-fire figures are estimates, not numbers from published sources.
- Line drawn: Semi-automatic handguns and bolt-action rifles, including powerful big-game rifles, fall outside the target. The AR-15, AK-47, M1 Garand, and Springfield M1A do not.
- Legal theory: CRIME cites colonial-era going-armed laws and argues that Fourth Amendment technology cases justify adapting constitutional rules to new tech.
Background
The Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller tied Second Amendment protection to arms "in common use" for lawful purposes. Heller also said that the right covers the kinds of weapons Americans actually keep. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), the Court set a text-and-history test for modern gun laws. Under Bruen, the government must show that a regulation fits the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation. Courts across the country have since split over how to apply that test to semi-automatic rifle bans. The Cook County and Connecticut cases now put that question before the justices. The Court's Fourth Amendment decisions CRIME cites, including Kyllo v. United States (2001) and Carpenter v. United States (2018), protected privacy against new surveillance tools. They did not shrink constitutional rights because technology advanced. CRIME's analogy runs the other way.
Why It Matters for Gun Owners
If the justices adopted a formula like MEpM, every semi-automatic rifle would face a new test. A gun's fate would depend on a rate-of-fire number, not on its design or how it works. Owners in Illinois, Connecticut, and other states with similar bans would feel it first. Owners of AK-pattern rifles, M1A rifles, and the M1 Garand would face the same threat. Handgun owners should pay attention too. The brief openly favors handguns over rifles, but a formula that counts rounds per minute can grow to cover any semi-automatic firearm. Watch the Court's orders list. A cert grant or denial in these cases will show whether the justices plan to hear the merits. Also watch which states copy whatever the Court decides. Bans spread fast after a favorable ruling, and they stay on the books for decades.
DownRange Analysis
The MEpM formula fails the Bruen test before it reaches the courtroom. Bruen asks what the Constitution's text covers and what the nation's historical laws allowed. Nothing in the Second Amendment mentions foot-pounds per minute. Nothing in American history ties the right to a rifle's energy output. CRIME's own appendix admits its inputs are guesses. A formula built on estimates cannot carry a constitutional ban. The math also ignores accuracy, shot placement, and whether a single round hits anyone. A shooter who misses every shot scores the same MEpM as one who lands every round. What should gun owners do right now? Stay informed on the docket, support the state and national organizations litigating these cases, and keep your records and membership current. Do not treat a clever brief as a serious threat to settled law. Treat it as a sign that the anti-gun side has run out of arguments that rely on the Constitution.
