Independent New Hampshire Journalism · Northfield, NHCorrection and update, Sept. 22, 2026, 9:03 a.m. EDT: This article, published Jan. 15, 2026, said HB 1793 was heading into committee hearings, called a 2025 study of three states “the most comprehensive multi-state study to date,” and described faculty surveys as coming from states with campus carry laws. According to the General Court bill docket, the House committee held its public hearing on Jan. 14, 2026, the day before publication; the study’s authors, writing in Injury Epidemiology, do not describe it that way and note that three states limit its statistical power; and the Urban Institute review the article cited says some of those surveys were done in states without such laws. Those passages are corrected. Since publication, the House passed HB 1793, the Senate passed a rewritten version, and the bill died on May 21, 2026 when the Senate refused the House request for a committee of conference; a paragraph near the end now records those votes.
By GSR Staff
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. New Hampshire House Republican leaders pointed to the December 2025 mass shooting at Brown University, which killed two people, 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. A 2025 study in the journal Injury Epidemiology, comparing campuses in three states that adopted permissive carry laws (Arkansas, Georgia, and Texas) with campuses in states that did not, found no statistically significant change in rates of major violence or burglary after the laws took effect. The authors cautioned that with only three states in the study, its statistical power and generalizability are limited. 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. A 2019 Urban Institute review of the research found that majorities of faculty and staff oppose campus carry, reasoning that concealed weapons decrease people’s sense of safety on campus and hurt campus climate; some of those studies were done in states without campus carry laws. A survey of 1,889 community college faculty in 18 states found a majority opposed allowing guns on campus out of concern it would create an unsafe climate, and disagreed that armed students would help bystanders protect themselves during an active shooting. (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 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)
The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee heard testimony on HB 1793 from students, campus police and others on Jan. 14, 2026 and voted 7-6 to recommend passage. The House passed the bill 188-165 on Feb. 5, 2026. The Senate passed a rewritten version 14-8 on May 14, 2026; that version would have barred public colleges from regulating non-lethal weapons, allowed faculty to carry firearms and created a committee to study guns on campus. The House rejected the Senate changes and asked for a committee of conference, and on May 21, 2026 the Senate refused, so the bill did not become law. (General Court bill docket; Citizens Count) About a dozen states allow campus carry; New Hampshire leaves the policy to each college. (New Hampshire Public Radio) 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.
Related: “HB 1793 Turns New Hampshire Campuses Into Experiments in Negligence,” a Granite State Report opinion column published Feb. 9, 2026.
Corrections: Granite State Report corrects verified errors promptly and appends a dated note identifying what changed and when. The corrections policy and the corrections register are public, and correction notes are never removed.
