McDonald was a huge win.

Self defense was confirmed as a fundamental constitutional right. That's a very big deal.

The 2nd Amendment was incorporated against the states. That's huge.

Delaware is, granted, more reasonable about open carrying firearms than some states (like Maryland) but it is now time for May-Issue CCW laws to be changed to Shall-Issue or Constitutional Carry (preferred, like Arizona.)

It should not take any longer for a citizen to be issued a CCW than it does to get a drivers license, instead of 6 months. "Keep and Bear Arms" is a fundamental constitutional right and driving is a privilege.

Living in Maryland does effect my strong feelings on firearms carry issues. I spend a lot of time in Delaware because my wife's family is mostly in Sussex Co. and we will probably be migrating there.

I do appreciate the DE / MD differences. No doubt, MD gun laws are some of the very worst in the country. DE is enlightened, by comparison.

Shall Issue is a hot button issue for me. I have a non-resident FL CCW permit and carry concealed much of the time when I am visiting DE. I have never been comfortable with open carry - personal preference.

It bugs me (a lot) that, the minute I move my residence to DE, my FL permit will no longer be valid in DE and, under current laws, I probably won't be allowed to CCW in my new home state for at least 6 months. My CCW rights as a DE resident will be less than my rights as a visitor from MD. That is absurd.

And it may take me a couple hours, at most, to get my DE drivers license and vehicles registered.

There is a monumental difference between the fundamental constitutional right to Keep and Bear Arms and the privilege of driving a car.

The entire nation should be "Shall Issue" or "Constitutional Carry," IMHO. A CCW from any state should be honored in every state, like a drivers license is. Realistically, the MVA is probably best equipped to issue a CCW permit most efficiently and I can see no reason why it couldn't be part of a drivers license (like a motorcycle endorsement.)

Any person who is not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm should be quickly approved for CCW. Six months is not quickly.

Personal references and publishing notices clearly should be unnecessary for exercising a fundamental constitutional right. The cost of currently required training may be burdensome to the poor and is therefore discriminatory and an unconstitutional requirement. Training requirements should be revised and streamlined. (Maryland handgun training is free and online.)

Delaware legislators would do well to look to VA and PA for guidance in updating CCW gun laws. Many current gun laws around the country are unconstitutional. Legislation can change them or, eventually, courts will.

What, if anything, is in the works in Delaware to change the likely unconstitutional 6-month May-Issue approval process into an instant Shall-Issue CCW permit for law abiding citizens?

Newsflash: McDonald did not hold that firearms outside of the home may not be restricted. Rather, it simply held that the Second Amendment does not permit banning ownership and possession of a firearm in the home for defense. Additionally, what restrictions on that right will be permitted (and they will be permitted) are yet to be tested.

I imagine the brand new case that the NRA has sponsored against the City of Chicago may, in about half a decade or so, make some of that clear.

Anyway, to challenge the constitutionality of the Delaware scheme, you are likely to have to get denied a CCDW permit.

AND, the five references you need for your DE license app must be residents of the DE county in which you newly reside! Also, one of the questions concerns how long they have known you.

True.

We may have a person or 2 here that fits that description, let's find a ( ) laywer and get the ball rolling.

Nothing "simple" about Heller or McDonald.

Heller and McDonald made specific mentions that felons and crazies can be restricted and certain "sensitive places" may be restricted. The majority held that they do not accept RKBA as a right to carry any weapon anywhere. That probably knocks out a turret mounted mini-gun on your pickup truck and carrying Stingers.

I'm only arguing for Shall-Issue CCW for handguns already accepted as legal for Open-Carry and May-Issue CCW. I am arguing that the DE application requirements and processing delays for issuing "May-Issue" are likely constitutional. There are easy legislative fixes for this.

A "Bear" case has not made it to SCOTUS for adjudication. However, Heller and McDonald clearly said RKBA is a fundamental right, which generally means "strict scrutiny." The SCOTUS did rule that any legislative "balancing" schemes would not pass scrutiny. That kills "May-Issue." Watch Palmer and Heller II appeals for more on Bearing Arms.

How can a fundamental constitutional right be valid inside one's home but not outside the front door? Obviously, that won't be accepted as constitutional.

Who are the best DE legislators to sponsor Shall-Issue legislation?

Good post, EZL!

One of the problems with 'shall issue' is that there's no way to get a clean bill passed. The last time it was attempted it was amended to death. If attempted again I'd guess the same thing would happen.

Since you have a FL license you should also have read the FL laws concerning when and where you can and can't carry. 10 or more pages of restrictions, tacked onto a fundamental right isn't the way to go. As well as the fact that many of the states that went shall issue also don't allow open carry (which doesn't have any government involvement and thus closer to be a right and not a privilege).

There are to many problems with concealed carry laws, reciprocity, and restrictions to ever think that it will be treated like a drivers license. It would be nice if it was treated like a drivers license, but the McDonald cases doesn't even come close to addressing that issue. It was very limited in scope (only dealing with guns being allowed to be owned in a home).

Even reading the Heller case it's apparent that the SCOTUS doesn't come close to believing in the right to bear arms being unrestricted. And restrictions means laws and government involvement, thus it's not a right. At least in DE we do have a right to bear arms, it's called OC. No license, no restrictions, no government approval or regulations.

Maybe Delaware will act dumb, like Maryland, and wait until they get sued.

The News: http://saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=334

The Lawsuit: http://saf.org/legal.action/md.lawsuit/complaint.pdf

They can do the right thing or, at a great expense, it will be done for them.

No state is going to fundamentally change their approach without letting the courts test out the most recent Supreme Court cases and see where they go. They may make adjustments here and there, but I would not anticipate any fundamental shifts just yet.