I am reading that more Republicans want to talk to Garland. Why? Ok. Talk about his view on gun ownership. And don't believe him if he claims he won't vote to strip 2nd amendment rights when they come before the SC, which they eventually will if he gets the nod. These GOP Senators are more concerned about how they are perceived by the left and media (what a surprise?!) than they are about our gun rights. There is no reason to even talk to the guy. But no doubt, the left will shower these Senators with praise for their maturity, or whatever. Meanwhile, those of us who elect individuals to protect our rights could be about to get screwed...again. "16 GOP Senators Back Meetings With Supreme Court Nominee" http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/gop-senators-meetings-SCOTUS/2016/03/29/id/721317/ Regarding Garland: http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/432716/moderates-are-not-so-moderate-merrick-garland "...Back in 2007, Judge Garland voted to undo a D.C. Circuit court decision striking down one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. The liberal District of Columbia government had passed a ban on individual handgun possession, which even prohibited guns kept in one’s own house for self-defense. A three-judge panel struck down the ban, but Judge Garland wanted to reconsider that ruling. He voted with Judge David Tatel, one of the most liberal judges on that court. As Dave Kopel observed at the time, the Tatel and Garland votes were no surprise, since they had earlier signaled their strong hostility to gun owner rights in a previous case. Had Garland and Tatel won that vote, there’s a good chance that the Supreme Court wouldn’t have had a chance to protect the individual right to bear arms for several more years. Moreover, in the case mentioned earlier, Garland voted with Tatel to uphold an illegal Clinton-era regulation that created an improvised gun registration requirement. Congress prohibited federal gun registration mandates back in 1968, but as Kopel explained, the Clinton Administration had been “retaining for six months the records of lawful gun buyers from the National Instant Check System.” By storing these records, the federal government was creating an informal gun registry that violated the 1968 law. Worse still, the Clinton program even violated the 1994 law that had created the NICS system in the first place. Congress directly forbade the government from retaining background check records for law abiding citizens. Garland thought all of these regulations were legal, which tells us two things. First, it tells us that he has a very liberal view of gun rights, since he apparently wanted to undo a key court victory protecting them. Second, it tells us that he’s willing to uphold executive actions that violate the rights of gun owners."....