Common Sense School Protection Going Nowhere in North Carolina

Arkansas School Posts Armed Teacher Warning Signs
Common Sense School Protection Going Nowhere in North Carolina

Arizona -( Several North Carolina legislators have introduced a common-sense solution to increase protection for schools in North Carolina. The bill, HB 1039, also known as the School Self-Defense Act, has been introduced, but has not been voted out of committee.  It is in the Committee on Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House.

The premise of the bill is simple. Take responsible members of the school staff who already are permitted to carry concealed weapons in the rest of the community. Require them to obtain training in responding to an active shooter. Allow them to carry concealed in the school, to provide a discreet, immediate armed response to a deadly force situation in the school. From

“HB 1039, School Self-Defense Act, would have allowed this common sense, practical solution to be implemented in North Carolina,” said Representative Larry Pittman (R) 82nd District, one of the bill’s sponsors. “However, seeking to avoid controversy in an election year, our leadership has chosen not to allow this bill even to be heard in committee. This is a failure to act that I fear may one day cost lives that could have been saved.”

House Bill 1039 authorizes some faculty or staff members to carry a handgun onto school grounds “to respond to acts of violence or an imminent threat of violence.”

“I believe that there are many teachers who would want to be armed and want to be in a position to protect their children from any kind of a school shooter,” said Jean Fitzsimmons, a retired teacher.

Under the bill, the person would need a valid concealed handgun permit and 16 hours of active shooter training. Plus, the school or governing body could opt out.

Polls have revealed about 20% of teachers favor having armed teachers capable of protecting the children in their schools. Many teachers have military and law enforcement experience.

People with concealed carry permits have already shown themselves to be extremely safe and responsible. Statistics on people who have concealed carry permits show that they are far less likely to commit crimes than police officers.

The bill simply removes many obstacles that have been put in place to make it difficult for teachers to provide protection for their students. It does not force any teachers to be armed but provides a mechanism for those who wish to volunteer, to do so.  As the teachers are volunteers, additional expenses to the school are minimal.

Advantages of this approach are many. Students do not know who, or how many, teachers may be armed at any one time. Thus, it becomes difficult to plan a successful rampage shooting. Rampage shooters typically plan their event for months, sometimes over a year, in advance. Introducing the variable of one or more unknown armed individuals in the school makes the planning far more difficult. Knowing that the individuals are trained to deal with active shooters increases the difficulty.

There is evidence that increasing the difficulty can cause potential shooters to abandon the project or to seek other targets. The more time used, the more possibility the shooter will be discovered, discouraged, or simply mature out of a dangerous fixation on rampage shootings.

The standard response to increasing the numbers of armed defenders in schools is a simplistic slogan – “no guns in schools”. The slogan makes no sense. The slogan might as well be “no guns in schools until too late!”

Requiring law enforcement to respond to an active shooter, from outside a school, has been shown to take too much time. Most active shooting incidents are over in five minutes.

Having a few volunteers who know how to use weapons, carry them concealed routinely, and who have had specialized training in reacting to active shooters, is simple, inexpensive, and effective on several levels.

The majority of teachers who do not wish to be armed would not be required to be armed. Those who have experience, the desire to protect, and the willingness to undergo some training, could do so.

Many teachers have already shown their willingness to engage active shooters when unarmed, often paying with their lives. Those teachers would have been much more effective if they had been allowed to be armed.

Having armed and known school police officers, who are unwilling to actually protect the students, was counterproductive in the Parkland shooting.

©2018 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten:Dean Weingarten

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Solution: Any teacher who wishes to extend protection  to the kids, here is the answer.. – These teachers must hold a State issued firearms carry permit, and these     armed teachers would be volunteers only.   – Teachers must receive specialized response and engagement firearms     training at their own expense. Hopefully at reduced rates.     – All firearms shall be kept locked inside a secured and “alarmed” gun safe box    inside the classroom. The gun safe shall be installed concealed, and out of     normal sight of children and visitors. If ever the safe is opened, an… Read more »


@Victor I like your suggestion that teachers be trained and armed, if they want to be, but there is a snag in your explanation. By the time someone fumbles with a lock to get to their gun a crazy could off quite a number of innocent people. Electronics to monitor when a person could access their gun and notify the police. I would think why, I bought this gun and it belongs to me. Why can I not remove it and take it home at the end of the day without causing a lot of bells going off and cops… Read more »

Jim Macklin

Teachers should carry a 9mm, such as a GLOCK 43 or a Ruger 9 or even an LCR. But they should have a bulletproof desk with an M4 SBR with a suppressor and EOTech sight. Training is important BUT getting armed teachers in the classroom ASAP is more important. Teachers don’t need to be trained to be SWAT or bomb disposal. There is no reason to hide the guns from the students. Most kids will be happier and better adjusted if they know there is a protector in the class. The AR the teacher is issued can be 5.56 or… Read more »


You forget a vast majority of teachers, administrators and school board are liberal anti-gunners. There motto is never let a good tragedy go to waste. Stopping the next shooting would rob them of anther excuse for a gun ban.


I have been saying for years, take down the stupid advertisement that schools are a safe place for a shooter to go on a rampage. Many people feel this way but the politicians, who are much smarter than we are, (sarcastic) feel it is a good way to have a crazy do his dirty work then he is caught or commits suicide. Who benefits from this? Time for politicians to remove their head from their stinky posterior.


There would also need to be some training for police, to make sure the real first responders aren’t mowed down by Leo’s with itchy trigger fingers.

Clark Kent

Then why don’t YOU become a police officer and show us all how it SHOULD be done? Put up or shut up.


Been there, done that, and he is still right. Next?


There are a lot of school teachers that are retired or past military. They are ideal to carry at school and I have a high revel of respect for them. However, a very good background check must me a part of this process! Look at the number of teachers that have been charged with a sex crime in recent years. And as bad as I hate to admit it, teachers are not what they used to be. There are some that are so liberal that they should not be teaching. They just want to brainwash students into a liberal way… Read more »

Jim Macklin

In a known dangerous environment choosing to not be armed is a suicidal thought and a sign of mental illness.
Mentally ill teachers need treatment. They also should not be allowed in a classroom until mentally fit.
The Constitution is not a majority rule document. If 80% or even 99% of the teachers do not want the minority to be armed, the constitution does not grant them te power to infringe on te right to life and self-defense of those who are not suicidal.