NH committee recommends HB 17-93 amid heated campus-carry debate
Loading...
Summary
The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee heard hours of public testimony for and against HB 17-93, a bill that would bar public universities from enforcing campus weapons bans; after extensive questioning of university and police witnesses it moved the bill out of executive session with a narrow committee recommendation.
CONCORD, N.H. — The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee recommended House Bill 17-93 after a daylong hearing in which students, university officials, police chiefs and legislators sharply disagreed about whether public colleges should be allowed to bar firearms on campus.
Representative Farrington introduced the bill as a restoration of rights, saying "Self defense is not a privilege. It is a natural right" and citing U.S. Supreme Court precedents he argued limit campus bans. Supporters, including students and veterans, told the committee that 18- and 19‑year‑olds should not be treated as a separate class of citizens while on public property and that carrying arms is an equal-rights issue.
UNH officials, campus police chiefs and many town leaders urged the committee to leave firearms policy with universities. "Adding levels of complexity by means of firearms being carried by individuals not directly involved in an event is counterintuitive," said Chief Steve Lee of the University of New Hampshire police, describing active‑shooter training and how multiple armed bystanders can hinder threat assessment and response. He and other witnesses cited concerns about suicide risk, intoxicated students, dormitory access and the frequency of large campus events involving children.
Durham town officials submitted a formal resolution saying the University System's autonomy includes campus safety policymaking and warning that the bill would "represent a significant and unnecessary intrusion by the state into the ability of local public safety officials and university leaders to tailor security measures." Many students testified both for and against the bill, with supporters arguing equal treatment under state law and opponents saying they fear increased violence and disruption to campus life.
Committee members pressed witnesses about data and legal questions. Proponents pointed to New Hampshire's strong preemption of firearms regulation by the legislature. Opponents pointed to the Bruen decision and to campus-specific safety needs, noting that universities already operate with campus police and event security.
After the public testimony the committee met in executive session. Members recorded a roll-call vote during the meeting; the clerk read individual yes/no votes (several members supported the motion and several opposed). The chair announced the motion carried and the minutes reflect a final corrected tally of 7–6 in favor of an "ought to pass" recommendation from the committee. The chair noted a request for a report by the end of the week and closed the executive session.
Next steps: an "ought to pass" recommendation from the committee sends HB 17-93 forward in the House process, but floor action and possible amendments will follow. Committee members who opposed the committee recommendation emphasized due-process, campus safety, and mental‑health concerns as areas for further consideration.
The hearing record includes numerous written and in-person submissions from student organizations, town councils and the University System of New Hampshire.
Sources: Committee proceedings and public testimony at the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee hearing on HB 17-93.
