Private school staff could carry weapons with permission

In North Carolina, a proposal called the Dominique Moody Act would carve out limited exceptions to the ban on weapons at school. It would not open private school grounds to general carrying. Instead, it would allow certain private-school employees and volunteers to carry a firearm or stun gun only if the school gives written permission and the person meets other requirements in state law.

The bill also reaches mixed-use campuses, where a school shares property with a place of worship. In that setting, a person with the right to carry a concealed handgun could do so while attending worship services and other religious functions. The idea is to separate a school’s ordinary day-to-day use from the property’s religious use, while still treating school property as restricted in most situations.

Written approval sits at the center of the private-school exception

The first exception is built around authorization from the school itself. A private-school employee or volunteer would need written approval from the school board of trustees or the school administrative director before carrying on educational property owned, used, or operated by the school. The law would cover a firearm or a stun gun.

That is a more controlled arrangement than a general permission to carry on campus. It leaves the decision with the school leadership, not with every individual worker or volunteer. In practical terms, a school could decide whether any staff member or volunteer should be armed, and if so, who. The state would still set the boundaries, but the school would make the first call.

The bill layers in training and permit rules

The proposal does not stop at written authorization. The person would also need a concealed handgun permit issued under North Carolina law, or they would have to be considered valid under another state provision governing permit recognition. The measure then adds another requirement: the person must complete at least eight hours of gun-safety and firearms-use training under the direct supervision of a certified National Rifle Association instructor or an equivalent instructor. That training would be annual, and it would sit on top of the training already required for a concealed handgun permit.

Those details matter because they show the bill is aimed at a narrow group of adults who are already subject to several layers of screening or instruction. The proposal is not treating a permission slip from the school as enough by itself. It asks for written approval, a permit or recognized permit status, and continued training. That combination makes the exception more limited than a simple policy change at the campus level.

The bill also ties the right to carry to a weapon list that is specific. The person could possess and carry a firearm or a stun gun, but the permission would not read as a broad license to carry any weapon at will on school grounds.

Private schools would also need written safety procedures

The measure places responsibilities on schools too. A private school that uses the exception would have to adopt and maintain written standard operating procedures for possession and carrying of the covered weapons on educational property. It would also have to give parents of enrolled students copies of those procedures every year.

That requirement gives the policy a family-facing piece. Parents would not be left to guess whether a school has a weapons policy or how it works. They would get the written rules annually, which suggests the bill expects schools to handle this issue in a formal, documented way. For families, that could make the arrangement more transparent. For school leaders, it would mean a continuing obligation to keep the policy current and share it with parents.

The bill also defines who can act for the school. A school administrative director is someone authorized by the school board of trustees to act on behalf of the private school. For parochial schools, the governing body can be the deacons, elders, or another designated board that oversees the affiliated place of worship. That language matters on church-linked campuses, where authority can rest with religious leadership rather than a separate school administration.

A separate exception for worship services on shared campuses

The second exception is aimed at a very specific setting. It would allow a person to carry a concealed handgun on educational property that is also the location of both a school and a place of religious worship, as long as the person is attending worship services or other sacerdotal functions there. The bill uses religious language on purpose. It reaches worship services, funeral services, wedding ceremonies, christenings, religious fellowships, and other sacerdotal functions at the place of worship.

The proposal also defines what counts as a place of religious worship. That term includes a church, chapel, meetinghouse, synagogue, temple, longhouse, mosque, or another building that is regularly used and clearly identifiable as a place for religious worship. It also defines “attending” to include going in and out between the place of worship and the designated parking area. So the exception is not just about what happens inside the building. It also covers the path to and from the parking area.

That distinction is important because many campuses do not fit neatly into one category. A building can host school activities during the week and worship on Sundays or other religious days. Under this bill, the legal treatment would depend on the use at the time, not just the address. The worship carveout is narrow, but it is designed to follow the religious function of the site.

When the change would take effect

The measure would take effect on December 1, 2025, and it would apply to offenses committed on or after that date. Until then, the current school-property weapons rules would remain in place. That gives schools, parents, and staff a clear date if they need to adjust policies, train employees, or update written procedures.

The broader picture is a bill that tries to draw finer lines inside a rule that is usually very broad. North Carolina’s school weapons ban would still be the default. But the proposal would allow a private school to choose a small group of authorized adults, and it would recognize the special status of worship on campuses that serve both educational and religious purposes. For supporters of those exceptions, the bill offers a way to match the law more closely to how some campuses actually operate. For schools, it would mean more responsibility, more paperwork, and a more formal process any time a weapon is involved on campus.