House Bill 674, titled the Firearms Liberty Act, makes several changes to North Carolina firearms law. The bill would authorize lifetime concealed handgun permits, allow permit holders to choose reissuance as a fixed-duration permit, and modify renewal rules so that some permittees who let a concealed carry permit lapse do not have to repeat firearms safety and training coursework under specified timing conditions. It also expands special rules for military permittees whose permits expire during deployment and adjusts permit fees, application forms, confidentiality provisions, and sheriff recordkeeping requirements to account for the new permit categories.
The bill also revises the state’s domestic violence protective order firearm-surrender process. It would allow a person subject to a domestic violence protective order to transfer surrendered firearms and ammunition to a qualified licensed firearms dealer for storage or sale after a waiting period, while keeping permits with the sheriff. The measure adds procedures for return, sale, and disposition of surrendered firearms, creates a related form process, and provides liability protections for dealers participating in these transfers. In addition, it creates a new “safety hold agreement” framework for federal firearms licensees who voluntarily store a customer’s lawfully possessed firearm, including confidentiality rules and limited immunity from civil liability except for negligent, reckless, or unlawful conduct.
Beyond concealed carry and domestic violence provisions, the bill authorizes public and nonpublic schools to store certain less-lethal defensive devices in biometric lock containers accessible only to trained authorized employees or law enforcement. It directs the Center for Safer Schools to establish device classifications and training standards, allows school safety grant funds to be used for the devices and storage containers, and adds civil liability protections for schools and employees except in cases of gross negligence, wanton conduct, or intentional wrongdoing. The bill also broadens door-lock exemptions for certain businesses, though the text provided focuses primarily on the firearms, school safety, and protective-order provisions.
The bill’s impact on state law is broad and structural: it amends multiple sections of Chapters 14, 50B, 115C, and 143B of the General Statutes, creates new statutory sections, and changes effective dates for different parts of the act. It would alter how concealed handgun permits are issued, renewed, revoked, and tracked; how firearms are handled in domestic violence cases; how firearms dealers may store firearms for private owners; and how schools may store and deploy defensive devices. Different provisions take effect on different dates, with some effective immediately, others on July 1, 2025, October 1, 2025, December 1, 2025, and January 1, 2026.
The general sentiment reflected in the voting history appears favorable but not unanimous. The bill passed second reading with 70 yeas and 42 nays, and later passed an amended second reading with 101 yeas and 10 nays, suggesting substantial support in the House after amendment. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded discussion to indicate specific arguments, but the vote pattern suggests the bill was generally supported while still drawing meaningful opposition.
The main points of contention likely center on the bill’s expansion of firearm access and storage rights versus public safety concerns. Supporters would likely emphasize permit flexibility, military accommodations, property rights for people subject to protective orders, and voluntary safe-storage options through licensed dealers. Opponents would likely focus on the risks of lifetime concealed carry permits, reduced training requirements after permit lapse, the transfer of surrendered firearms through dealers, and the authorization of defensive devices in schools, especially the biometric-access provisions and liability limits. These issues appear to be the most politically sensitive parts of the measure.
The bill amends North Carolina firearms, domestic violence, and school safety statutes by creating lifetime concealed handgun permits, revising permit renewal and lapse rules, and establishing new procedures for military permittees, permit fees, and sheriff recordkeeping. It also changes the domestic violence protective order firearm-surrender process to allow storage or sale through qualified licensed firearms dealers, adds a new voluntary firearm storage framework for federal firearms licensees, and authorizes schools to store and use certain less-lethal defensive devices in biometric safes. These changes affect sheriffs, permit applicants and holders, military personnel, domestic violence respondents and petitioners, licensed firearms dealers, schools, and the Center for Safer Schools.
The bill appears to have received generally favorable treatment in the House, but with notable opposition. It passed second reading by a narrower margin before later passing an amended second reading by a much larger margin, indicating that amendments may have broadened support. The absence of committee transcripts limits direct insight into debate, but the voting history suggests the bill was ultimately viewed positively by a majority while still remaining controversial among a significant minority.
The most likely areas of contention are the bill’s expansion of concealed carry rights, especially the creation of lifetime permits and the waiver of repeat training for some lapsed permits, and its school-related firearms provisions. Critics would likely argue that these changes reduce safeguards and increase risk, while supporters would frame them as administrative relief and self-defense measures. The domestic violence section may also be disputed because it allows respondents to route surrendered firearms through licensed dealers for storage or sale, raising concerns about access and enforcement, even as supporters may view it as a property-rights protection. Liability immunity for dealers and schools is another likely point of disagreement.