Absolutely not! Shall-issue is not measurably different from may-issue, and is even arguably worse, from a liberty advocate's point of view.
Both schemes involve the government licensing a fundamental human right as a revocable privilege.
Both schemes involve giving up liberty and privacy (giving all the information, submitting to all the background checks, taking all the tests, being put on all the lists, paying all the money the government requires) in exchange for a little temporary safety (from being arrested and imprisoned for carrying a concealed weapon).
The only difference is that with shall-issue schemes, the government pretends that it's respecting the rights of its citizens, and that it has no choice in the matter, when it ought to be perfectly clear that it can revoke anyone's license anytime it wants, for any reason or no reason. Therefore, people under shall-issue schemes are less likely to recognize the degree of encroaching enslavement they're under than people under may-issue or no-issue schemes.
Imagine arguing about whether shall-issue or may-issue schemes are better for licensing the practice of religion, or the operation of a printing press, or public speaking.
All you folks out there who are in favor of shall-issue concealed-carry licensing had better not start complaining when the antigun newspapers start insisting on publishing lists of your names and addresses. Once you have a license to carry, that information is public, you know.
Haven't you ever heard a cop say "*I* AM the law around here!"? I even heard a judge once tell a class graduating from a community college LEO course,"Don't worry about what is Constiutional. *I* am the one who decides if you have a legal right to do or not do something,and I will ALWAYS rule on your side!"