I agree that the litigant and attorney for these cases should be carefully chosen. However, this is the "correct" way to get the law overturned. We need a concerted effort to find the right litigant and the right attorney. We need someone who has standing and a pristine background. Ideally, they should already have funding, but maybe a community fundraising effort will work as well.
BTW, ACLU bashing might be fun but state ACLU chapters have actually defended firearm owners in the past when there were significant privacy or other civil liberty issues. For example, Nevada ACLU successfully argued that a seizure of firearms was an illegal seizure. The official stance of the ACLU is that if there are other civil rights issues around gun control/gun registration ACLU will defend gun owners.
The ACLU also doesn't actively litigate or even support gun control. They removed the footnote saying they supported gun control from their statement official stance (
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/con11.htm). However, their official stance is also that Heller was a mistake (
http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_...law-reform_immigrants-rights/second-amendment)
So, while the ACLU isn't pro gun, they aren't actively anti-gun and they have helped gun owners when their other rights were being infringed. I'd say when it comes to guns, the ACLU is, at worst, slightly negative in stance but in practice, slightly positive.
