With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 351 F.Supp.2d 213, 217 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). As Defendants point out, and Plaintiffs do not dispute, Plaintiffs are still able to obtain a gun license to own a shotgun or a rifle as a good guy letter is not necessary for the purchase and possession of those firearms. Without the good guy letter, Plaintiffs are simply prevented from possessing and carrying a pistol, not all firearms. Since “there is no allegation that Defendants’ actions have affected Plaintiffs’] ability to retain or acquire other firearms ... the conduct alleged in the [First] Amended Complaint does not amount to a Second Amendment violation.” Vaher v. Town of Orangetown, 916 F.Supp.2d 404, 430 (S.D.N.Y. 2013); see also McGuire v. Village of Tarrytown, No. 08 Civ. 2049, 2011WL 2623466, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2011) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Defendants’ motion to dismiss

A: holding that individual defendants were not liable under the elcra because they did not have the authority to rehire the plaintiff
B: holding that plaintiffs did not have standing because they did not sue the party with the clear ability to act
C: holding that because defendants did not prevent plaintiff from acquiring another weapon they did not impede plaintiffs right to bear arms
D: holding that plaintiff state employees contract right to be discharged only for cause was not protected by due process clause because it did not rise to level of fundamental right
C.