Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Brown v. Crowe, 963 F.2d 895 (6th Cir.1992). That cannot be said to be the case here, especially in view of the fact that the “prior restraint” cases cited in the plaintiffs’ appellate briefs simply are not applicable to the facts of this case. Hence, even if the issue had been squarely presented, we could not find in the plaintiffs’ favor based on the authority submitted on appeal. There remains the equal protection question, which is raised here under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The district court held that the claim was non-cognizable because the Equal Protection Clause protects against inappropriate classifications of people, rather than things. This position has been adopted by several courts. See, e.g., Benjamin v. Bailey, 234 Conn. 455, 662 A.2d 1226 (1995); California Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. City of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection
B. holding that doctrine does not violate equal protection
C. holding that the state law violated equal protection principles
D. holding that a state weapons ban did not violate equal protection principles because the plaintiffs challenge related to classifications among weapons not persons
E. holding that ch 980 does not violate principles of equal protection
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.