Delaware Concealed Carry Forum
CCW Methods & Issues => General CCW Discussion => Topic started by: ezliving on July 01, 2010, 01:49:48 AM
-
McDonald was a huge win.
Self defense is confirmed as a fundamental constitutional right. That's a very big deal.
The 2nd Amendment is incorporated against the states. That's huge.
Delaware is, granted, more reasonable about carrying firearms than some states (like Maryland) but it is now time for May-Issue 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.
Any person who is not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm should be quickly approved for CCW. Personal references and publication in a newspaper should not be unnecessary. The cost of required training may be burdensome to the poor and is therefore discriminatory. Training requirements should be revised and streamlined. (Maryland handgun training is free and online.)
Delaware would do well to look to VA and PA for guidance.
What, if anything, is in the works in Delaware?
-
The only sad part about it and that part is significant, is that it was a 5-4 decision. It should have been 9-0.
-
while it was a huge win for us,let's not overstate it. I haven't read this decision yet but I imagine it is written much like the Heller decision. While the court said it self protection is a god given right they also said it is a right that should be regulated by the goverment. Since it took 2 years for the Mcdonald case to get from filing to scotus decision, it may very well take @@@@ near a lifetime to realize any real changes.
-
and let's not forget...it's already been 2 years since Heller...and there really hasn't been any noticeable change in DC... >:(
-
In addition to The 2nd Amendment being incorporated against the states, McDonald ruling decided that self defense and RKBA were both fundamental rights.
The designation of "fundamental" is most significant.
The decision: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf
-
Remember though that both cases revolved around the mere ownership of handguns, and I think both also state for the purpose of protecting ones home. Neither case involved the right to carry. Since Delaware has never banned handguns I doubt the people in Dover are going to rush to change us to a shall issue state. Don't forget also that both of those handgun bans stood for about 30 years before being challenged and overturned, so nothing is going to move fast.
-
What fundamental constitutional right is limited to inside one's own home? Step outside and you lose the fundamental constitutional right?
That dog won't hunt..
-
I got into this discussion to simply say that I don't think the macdonald case will have any immediate impact on Delaware or the nations gun laws but now I'm not sure what the hell is going on in this topic. I'm just going to sign off from this topic and probably any other I see you post in.
-
Am I missing something here?????
-
I dunno Sig, maybe its me.... It seems to me that he's argueing the opinion with me as if I wrote it. Like it or not, whether the dog will hunt or not, the court protected the ownership of handguns for the protection of the home. "In Heller, we held that the Second Amendment protectst the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense. Unless considerations of stare decisis counsel otherwise, a provision of the Bill of Rights that protects a right that is fundamental from an American perspective applies equally to the Federal Governmentand the States. See Duncan, 391 U. S., at 149, and n. 14. We therefore hold that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller.The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings." page 44, 45 of Justice Alitos opinion.
-
I read the news and the decisions... Heller and McDonald. SCOTUS decided the questions that they were asked. We are not in disagreement on those issues.
I'm discussing new questions. This is a discussion forum.
Many current gun laws around the country are unconstitutional. Legislation can change them or, eventually, courts will.
One thing is certain. Bear is as constitutional as Keep. They are inseparable.
-
EZ, I see that your profile lists you as located in MD. If so, I can understand your frustrations with the current state of affairs...in MD.
In DE, we're less irritated, as there is a more reasonable approach to the 2nd...no registration, relatively reasonable approach to Concealed Carry, and even open carry for those so inclined. There are some problems (some lack of full preemption) but overall a reasonable balance exists. So, I feel your frustration, but I think you'll find the members of this forum to be thoughtful, intelligent, pragmatic, and open to discourse...which is what makes this the great place it is. SIG and Envy are two of the good guys, and as you can see they've been around for a good while.
I don't think you could hope for a better bunch of folks. Not everyone has exactly the identical perspective, but that's what keeps this forum interesting. I for one appreciate the diversity of opinions, especially when there are perspectives I hadn't yet considered...so I hope you are passionate and not....um...trolling. I'm sure that's not the case...right?
-
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 to DE, my FL permit will no longer be valid in DE and I probably won't be allowed to CCW in my new home state for at least 6 months. My rights as a resident will be less than my rights as a visitor. That is absurd.
And it will take me a couple hours, at most, to get my drivers license and vehicle registered. Personal references and publishing notices clearly should be unnecessary for exercising a fundamental constitutional right.
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.) As I wrote in my original posting...
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.
Any person who is not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm should be quickly approved for CCW. Personal references and publication in a newspaper should not be unnecessary. The cost of required training may be burdensome to the poor and is therefore discriminatory. Training requirements should be revised and streamlined.
I'm not trying to pick a fight here and, for the record, I'm not planning to ever be a candidate for the Delaware General Assembly. I expect state representatives to follow The Constitution and hope Delaware passes Shall Issue before I move there.
I don't doubt that Maryland will still be infringing on the constitutional rights of citizens to carry firearms there when I finally move away. "Free State," my @@@.
-
I'm not trying to pick a fight here and, for the record, I'm not planning to ever be a candidate for the Delaware General Assembly. I expect state representatives to follow The Constitution and hope Delaware passes Shall Issue before I move there.
Even if Delaware was a shall issue state you will still wait 6 months because the only change would be unless you have a back ground check issue you will still need to do everything else and they still only have one person processing the permits. For the most part Delaware is a very liberal may issue state, very few people get denied.
-
I understand current DE law. I expect the laws to be updated to reflect McDonald.
Waiting 6 months can't stand scrutiny. Neither will a requirement for personal references. If other states can issue a permit in less than an hour, DE should be able to, too.
-
Other than being slow, the DE process is fairly reasonable, but I think the public notice is not necessary. FL seems to have a really good operation. Fast too. PA is too easy. Any knucklehead can get a permit there. I think training is a good thing.
By the way, I just got back from vacation in VA. I saw a few people open carrying there and no one seemed to be the least bit concerned. I like Virginia. My kind of place.
-
Even knuckleheads have fundamental constitutional rights.
Before they restrict their RKBA, maybe the voting rights of knuckleheads should be restricted. J/K.
... but I think you get my point.
-
Even knuckleheads have fundamental constitutional rights.
Before they restrict their RKBA, maybe the voting rights of knuckleheads should be restricted. J/K.
... but I think you get my point.
Ok ezliving that's enough, I'm not gonna allow this topic to get out of hand, you obviously have a very strong opinion about this, but at this point this topic is not going anywhere. I understand how you feel but just because the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the 2A it does not mean things will change over night it will take years whether you want to believe it or not. Just look at how long its been since the Heller case and nothing has really changed in DC except a bunch of extremely restrictive gun laws.
-
McDonald was not a clear win for us, but it was a win. :-\ Basically, it opened the door for more lawsuits. It's a better decision than what could of come out of it, but, I wouldn't expect for States to start issuing CCWs out of vending machines.
Pertaining to McDonald, clearly the Brady folks didn't see this as a loss, and here are some thoughts from Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke:
Question: After this ruling, what can states and cities still do to restrict handguns and try to mitigate handgun violence?
Paul Helmke: Actually it's a very narrow ruling, especially when you look at both this ruling and the Heller ruling two years ago. They both deal just with the right to have a gun in your home for self defense, and they both say, and Justice Alito from the bench today talked about [how] the Second Amendment is a right to have a gun in the home for self defense. Alito today repeated the lang that Justice Scalia used two years ago and said this right is not unlimited. In his decision they talk about [it], and they repeat the language in the Heller decision that you can restrict who gets guns, you can restrict where they take the guns, you can restrict how guns are carried, you can restrict how guns are sold, you can restrict how guns are stored, you can restrict what kind of guns there are. So by repeating the Heller language today in the McDonald decision, the fact that Alito reinforced that outside of a handgun ban, cities can do a number of things to help reduce gun violence in their communities, and the challenge is going to be, with the McDonald case, there are going to be a lot of lawsuits fighting over where to draw the line on each of those things that I just mentioned.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/06/interview-brady-campaign-president-paul-helmke-on-why-the-gun-ruling-isnt-so-bad/58849/
-
I find it incredible that there was even any question that any part of the Bill of Rights did or didn't apply to the States. What's even more incredible is that (as I believe someone in this forum already stated) the ruling was 5 to 4. If we ever lose our slim majority in the Supreme Court, God help us. We could lose everything. When you vote for president, think of the Supreme Court. That's our last line of defense.
Ezliving was right, knuckleheads who vote are a problem, but they do have rights.
-
Corbon, I think McDonald was a huge win. If you are looking to The Brady Bunch for analysis, you will get their biased spin. And the NRA has their spin. And SAF has their spin. And I have my spin.
Helmke is wrong on one major point. SCOTUS will not allow a "balancing test" for a fundamental constitutional right. And dicta is not the same as settled law.
Any win at the Supreme Court is a huge win. SCOTUS rules and there is no appeal.
McDonald was a 14th Amendment case and, lo and behold, the 2nd Amendment is incorporated against the states. The majority got the question right and of the 4 justices that voted against McDonald, 3 of them also voted against Heller. Heller was also a huge win.
McDonald was all about incorporating the 2nd Amendment against the states by the 14th Amendment, not about expanding 2nd Amendment law. The fact that the SCOTUS majority in McDonald also reinforced that self-defense is a fundamental right, and the 2nd Amendment is a fundamental right was whipped cream and cherries on a fantastic dessert.
There will be many more lawsuits because there are many state and local laws on the books that must be challenged and struck down for infringing on the 2nd and 14th Amendments. That's the process.
States will either repeal / amend bad gun laws or face expensive court challenges. McDonald was a game-changer. States can either do the right thing or suffer the consequences of defending unconstitutional laws.
That was my point for starting this topic. Delaware has gun control regulations / laws that will not stand up to strict scrutiny and they will have to be be changed, one way or another.
As long as 5 certain justices remain healthy for a few more years, RKBA will remain safe, and more pro-RKBA decisions will multiply in courts from coast to coast.
-
and let's not forget...it's already been 2 years since Heller...and there really hasn't been any noticeable change in DC... >:(
Watch Palmer and Heller II.
-
And I have my spin.
I know, I know, I came back after all. After reading some of the posts and realizing that you just wanted a soap box to preach about fundamental constitutional rights from and that you werent really arguing with me about fundamental constitutional rights I figured I would check back in. Do you realize that the only spin that is putting this as a huge win about fundamental constitutional rights is yours? NRA, SAF, NSSF and even the Bradys say it was a minor win about fundamental constitutional rights that will need much more fighting before anything is really won. Hell even Heller and Mcdonald themselves realize that it wasn't that big of a win (hence the second Heller lawsuit about fundamental constitutional rights) Either way, I'm sure its only a matter of time (and I'm sure it will happen rather soon) before all of the states realize that this is a fundamental constitutional right and stop their unjust and illegal restrictions on our fundamental constitutional rights.