By Granite State Report
New Hampshire’s Legislature is once again wrestling with one of the most emotionally charged issues in state policy: whether public colleges and universities should be barred from restricting firearms and other weapons on campus, a policy often called “campus carry.” House Bill 1793, known as the Protecting College Students Act, would strip schools of the authority to regulate the possession or carrying of firearms and “non-lethal weapons” like tasers and pepper spray on campuses that receive public funding. The bill’s sponsor, UNH student and Representative Sam Farrington, frames it as a defense of constitutional rights and personal safety. Opponents — including many students, faculty, and campus police — warn of anxiety, danger, and confusion if classrooms and dorms become potential firearms environments. (New Hampshire Public Radio)
The debate is fierce because both sides claim the mantle of safety — but define it differently. Farrington and other supporters argue that law-abiding students should not lose Second Amendment protections simply by crossing a campus boundary. The New Hampshire GOP leadership has highlighted recent mass shootings, including the tragedy at Brown University, to argue that “gun-free zones” do not deter violence and leave potential victims defenseless. In that view, armed students and staff can be a last line of defense in the worst-case scenario. (New Hampshire Public Radio)
On the opposite side, many students and campus officials describe the prospect of widespread firearm carry as a source of fear and distraction rather than freedom. A freshman at the University of New Hampshire summed up this sentiment: merely knowing that a classmate could be carrying a gun can add pressure and stress to the already demanding environment of higher education. UNH Police Chief Steve Lee has publicly warned that multiple armed individuals during an emergency — even those with good intentions — could confuse first responders and make it harder to secure a dangerous scene. (New Hampshire Public Radio)
Beyond anecdote and intuition, research evidence is mixed and limited. The most comprehensive multi-state study to date — comparing campuses in states with permissive carry laws (like Arkansas, Georgia, and Texas) to those without — found no statistically significant change in rates of violent crime or burglary following the implementation of campus carry policies. This suggests that, at least in those broad terms, allowing firearms did not drastically alter overall campus crime, but also did not clearly improve safety through deterrence. (Springer Link)
Others, like public health researchers, point out that the assumptions underpinning campus carry — particularly the idea that arming more people deters active shooters — are not strongly supported in the broader gun policy literature. Studies have shown that high-fatality mass shooters often do not choose targets based on local gun policies, and that defensive gun uses in violent crime are relatively rare and difficult to verify. Researchers also highlight that college campuses pose unique risks: students are young adults in developmental stages marked by higher rates of interpersonal conflict, alcohol use, and mental health challenges — all factors that could turn what begins as a minor incident into a lethal one when firearms are present. (Johns Hopkins Public Health)
Perceptions matter too. National surveys of faculty and staff in states with campus carry laws indicate that many educators feel less safe and worry that firearms could escalate conflicts, even if they do not necessarily change their daily routines. A study of community college faculty across 18 states found a majority opposed allowing guns on campus, citing concerns about climate and safety rather than confidence in armed bystanders. (Urban Institute)
At the same time, supporters often point to broader data on New Hampshire itself: the state has been a constitutional carry state since 2017, and has maintained relatively low violent crime rates over that period. They interpret this as evidence that allowing lawful carry — even broadly — need not lead to catastrophe, and that personal defense rights can coexist with public order. (bearingarms.com)
So what does the evidence actually say? There is no clear consensus that campus carry will dramatically reduce violent incidents or make campuses safer overall. The best data suggests little measurable change in major campus crime rates after implementation, but also that the specific context of college environments — where young adults live, learn, and socialize in close quarters — complicates easy judgments. Perceptions of safety diverge sharply: some students feel empowered by the right to carry, others feel heightened anxiety. Data on mass shootings and active shooter scenarios shows that they are rare and unpredictable, and that arming more people does not necessarily equate to effective deterrence. (Springer Link)
What is clear is that this debate isn’t going away soon. HB 1793 is heading into committee hearings where testimony from campus communities — students, faculty, staff, and law enforcement — will shape whether New Hampshire joins a small but growing group of states that limit institutional authority to ban firearms on campuses. As the conversation continues, Granite Staters will have to grapple not just with constitutional questions about rights, but with practical questions about what kind of environments we want our colleges to be — places of learning, fear, preparedness, or something in between.
