House Bill 193 / SL 2025-81
HB 193 makes several changes to North Carolina law centered on firearms access, protections for public officials, election-related intimidation, and shooting range regulation. First, it creates a new exception to the school-grounds weapons ban for certain employees and volunteers at nonpublic schools who have written authorization from the school’s governing body, hold a valid concealed handgun permit, complete annual firearms safety training, and follow school operating procedures. It also allows a person with a valid concealed handgun permit to carry a handgun on educational property that is also a place of religious worship while attending worship services and related religious functions, subject to posted prohibitions and other limits.
The bill also increases criminal penalties for assaults and threats against executive officers, legislative officers, court officers, local elected officers, and election officers. It rewrites the relevant offenses to raise felony classifications, expands the definitions of protected officers, and requires that pretrial release decisions in these cases be made by a judge rather than a magistrate. The judge must review criminal history, may impose stay-away and no-contact conditions, and may hold the defendant for up to 48 hours while release conditions are determined.
In addition, HB 193 strengthens statutory protections for sport shooting ranges and relocated law enforcement shooting ranges. It limits nuisance and noise-based civil or criminal actions against ranges that were operating in compliance with applicable laws when they began operation, restricts the application of later-adopted noise rules, and provides special protections for law enforcement ranges that relocate within the same county after long-term operation, including limits on local setback requirements and restrictions on night operations.
The bill’s impact on state law is broad but targeted: it amends Chapter 14 on weapons offenses and officer protection, Chapter 15A on pretrial release, and Chapter 163 on election-officer intimidation. It also adds or revises definitions and creates new statutory exceptions and procedural requirements that affect nonpublic schools, religious institutions located on school property, criminal defendants charged with threats or assaults against officials, and owners/operators of shooting ranges. The bill became law over the Governor’s veto.
The overall sentiment appears to have been supportive among legislative leaders, given that the bill was ratified and later enacted notwithstanding the Governor’s objections. The main points of contention are likely the firearms-related provisions, especially the expansion of concealed carry on school property tied to religious worship and the authorization for armed nonpublic-school employees and volunteers, as well as the tougher criminal penalties and pretrial detention rules for threats against officials. The shooting-range protections may also have drawn concern from local governments and nearby property owners because they limit nuisance claims and local regulation.
HB 193 amends multiple chapters of the General Statutes, including Chapter 14, Chapter 15A, and Chapter 163. It creates new exceptions to the prohibition on weapons on educational property for certain authorized nonpublic-school employees and volunteers, expands concealed-carry access on school property that also serves as a place of worship, increases penalties for assaults and threats against specified public officers, requires judge-level pretrial release decisions in those cases, and strengthens statutory protections for sport shooting ranges and relocated law enforcement ranges. The act applies prospectively to the criminal-law sections beginning December 1, 2025, while the rest became effective upon enactment.
The bill appears to have had enough legislative support to pass and become law despite a gubernatorial veto, suggesting favorable sentiment in the General Assembly. The measure’s supporters likely viewed it as a package of security and property-rights protections for schools, houses of worship, public officials, election officers, and shooting ranges. The veto and override indicate that the bill was controversial enough to draw executive opposition, particularly around firearms access and the expansion of criminal penalties and detention procedures.
The most notable contention likely centered on the bill’s firearms provisions, especially allowing certain armed nonpublic-school employees and volunteers on school property and permitting concealed handguns on educational property that is also a place of worship during services. Another likely point of dispute was the increase in penalties and the mandatory judge review for pretrial release in cases involving threats or assaults against public officials and election officers, which raises due-process and detention concerns. The shooting-range provisions may also have been contested by local governments and neighboring landowners because they limit nuisance suits, restrict later noise regulations, and constrain local zoning or setback rules.