Hearing held on concealed carry for teachers

This last week, the Judiciary Committee had the public hearing for my bill, LB879. The bill would give freedom to the governing body of any school to choose a security policy in their school that allows chosen employees who have taken 24 additional hours of training to carry a concealed handgun in their school. I would like to highlight in this letter how this discussion this year seems to be a more balanced discussion than my first bill in 2011. I see this as encouraging as this debate continues.

LB516, from 2011, my first attempt to allow concealed carry of a handgun by administrators, teachers, and security personnel in a school brought out almost hysterical arguments in opposition. I'm happy to say the conversations this time around have been mostly reasonable and constructive.

In my opening in the hearing I spoke of several states, which allow it, and others who are considering whether to allow concealed carry in schools. For example, Utah has allowed any concealed carry permit holder to carry in schools for the past 14 years, without incident. New Hampshire and Hawaii have no laws against it, and the Missouri Senate just passed SB613, which includes a provision allowing concealed carry by local choice.

But, the point I stressed to the committee is the vast differences in schools throughout Nebraska. In the North Central, Western, and Southwestern parts of this state response times to a school shooting could be 15 to 30 minutes, depending on where the closest law enforcement officer is located at the time. The potential harm could be devastating, without any ability for school employees and students to defend themselves.

Many rural schools do not have the finances to hire a full time resource officer, and law enforcement do not have the personnel to spare. A one-size-fits-all approach to school security does not make sense in Nebraska. Local control regarding school security is the direction I believe Nebraska should head.

I believe the idea is beginning to sink in that what is good for large schools in the eastern part of the state is not necessarily good for schools everywhere. In fact, John Bonaiuto, with the Nebraska Association of School Boards, made it clear in the hearing that members in that association requested that though the official position of the organization was opposed to LB879, that there were members in the western part of the state that see a potential need for such policy because of the vast differences in response times and resources.

During the hearing, I asked the committee that as a society, how should we respond to such senseless violence, like what happened at Millard South High School in Omaha, or a Columbine or Sandy Hook? I said people tend to respond in three different ways, the way I see it. We either resign ourselves to the idea that, "this is just the way things are now" and do nothing; or we crack down by taking freedoms away, which usually affects law abiding people the most; or we give people more freedom to defend themselves. Most of you know that the latter is how I lean. I believe that the governing bodies of schools can handle the freedom and make wise choices in their schools and communities to take care of faculty and students.

If you have any questions or comments, contact my office. Mark R. Christensen, PO Box 94604, Lincoln, NE 68509, 402-471-2805 or mchristensen@leg.ne.gov.