I read up to the descent and stopped. Can't stand to hear whining.

Some takeaways I see: we can carry in state parks of course (yes ommelanden, I looking at you! ), we can also open carry in school zones and recreation areas, just don't commit a crime. Yes, that means U of D too. Delaware has always been an open carry state!

Good stuff!

It would apply to anything covered under the ban, which was all land administered by F&W/DNREC. So, all state parks and forests... and I believe also the army corps of engineers land at the canal since that's run by DE F&W.

I've been reading through the ruling, it's very well-written and has a lot of background to support their determination. They refer many times to the Doe vs Wilmington Housing Authority and the Heller v DC rulings. They also strongly recognize that Delaware is an "open carry" state. "Delaware is -- and always has been -- an “open
carry” state."

And then... you get to the dissent section. Where you'll be told that people with legal guns don't have the ability to control their emotions or know enough to not get drunk while they have a gun. They also believe that state parks and forests are "sensitive" (like a courthouse). Also that this will make it more likely for people to poach or use firearms in the wrong seasons. I think they believe that the forests and parks will be the wild west with folks shooting randomly...

This was only a 3-2 decision (Valihura(R), Vaughn(D) and Traynor(R) vs Strine(D) and Seitz(D)), but thankfully it fell on the side of common sense!

WOOHOO!!!!

A big thanks to anyone and everyone who had any hand in making this happen! This is really a great opinion not just because of the judgement to reverse, but because it was so well written, and so explicitly demonstrated that our Delaware Constitutional protection is merely a protection of a natural and pre-existing right.


I couldn't believe the Dissent actually went along with that at all - or that anyone would be stupid enough to even try claiming such with a straight face. Forrests, parks, wildlife, etc, being comprised of NATURE, are by the very definition of the word the NATURAL e.g. de facto state of being - there is no way for the default position, in its most general sense, to ever be so "sensitive" as to be set aside as a special case for regulation!


I had to browse over a good bit of the descent too, the repetitive whining just got too annoying The part about the Delaware Safe Schools and Recreation Zones law isn't anything new or that was in question; they merely referred to the current state of being for that law to show that even schools weren't being regulated as restrictively as the supposedly "sensitive" natural areas.

Does anyone know what the procedural mechanism / timeline to enforceability is on this? For example the Superior Court decision having been reversed, does the reversal immediately invalidate the regulations, or is it automatically remanded back to the Superior Court for re-consideration / procedural process conclusions before the resulting strike-down takes effect?

IANAL and don't play one on TV, but to reverse without remand invalidates a lower court's ruling and its over. That's it. No remand, no re-hearing by a lower court, no procedural process, etc. In this case, the court has decided "the regulations are unconstitutional on their face". Not sure how that could be interpreted in any way other than they are null and void.

Looks like I can finally go fishing wherever I want without giving up my right to protect myself.

The Supreme Court's decision invalidates the regulations and renders them null and void immediately. There is no further right of appeal. Case over. Good guys win this one.

Hey, haven't seen you around here in a while! Thanks, that's what I figured but I try to never underestimate the amount of bureaucracy government can come up with

All the park "No Firearms Allowed" signs will be removed and sold to gun ranges as targets.

was looking at thegunfeed today, and there was another link to this issue.

took a quick look at the state park regs. section 21.1 seems to be the offending item, per the ruling.

lets see how long they let the posted regs ride before correction. granted, it's only been a week or so since the ruling, but if it's like other gun related things, i see .gov dragging their feet a good bit.

maybe by may '18, just before the opening of the camping/tourist season?