North Carolina Constitutional Carry Gets Vetoed – Here’s What That Tells Us
On June 20, North Carolina Governor Josh Stein vetoed Senate Bill 50, known as the “Freedom to Carry NC” Act, which is a move that immediately sparked outrage from gun rights advocates, Republican leaders, and everyday citizens who simply want to carry without jumping through bureaucratic hoops.
Governor Josh Stein gestures while speaking at a podium during a public appearance. His recent veto of the North Carolina Constitutional Carry bill, SB 50, has sparked strong reactions across the state. (AP Photo)
If signed into law, North Carolina Constitutional Carry bill SB 50 would have made it the 30th Constitutional Carry state in the U.S., allowing law-abiding adults 18 and older to carry concealed without a permit. Instead, Governor Stein claimed that eliminating the permit process “makes North Carolinians less safe” and “undermines responsible gun ownership.”
In other words: trust the government, not your own judgment.
Let’s be clear, training matters. We at ConcealedCarry.com advocate training every day. But requiring government approval to exercise a right? That’s not safety, that’s control. Stein’s veto isn’t about safety; it’s about maintaining gatekeeping through regulation.
The Political Reality of North Carolina Constitutional Carry
To override the veto, North Carolina’s General Assembly will need a three-fifths majority in both chambers. That’s 72 votes in the House (currently 71 Republicans and 49 Democrats) and 30 votes in the Senate (30 Republicans, 20 Democrats). So the fight isn’t over, but it will be close.
Senate Leader Phil Berger didn’t mince words: “It’s past time for us to join the majority of states that recognize Constitutional Carry.”
He’s right. This is about keeping up with 29 other states that have acknowledged what we all know, your right to self-defense doesn’t start at a government office or end with a laminated card.
A current map of Constitutional Carry laws in the United States as of 2025. States highlighted in green allow permitless concealed carry for law-abiding citizens, while states in blue still require a permit to carry concealed.
What the Bill Actually Said
SB 50 wasn’t a reckless free-for-all. It maintained reasonable restrictions:
- Felons, those under indictment, and people deemed mentally ill are still prohibited from carrying.
- It clarified carrying in locked vehicles and private property.
- Employees living on campus under specific conditions could carry.
- The bill still allowed permits for reciprocity and firearm purchases.
In short, it streamlined the path for law-abiding citizens to carry responsibly, without being taxed, delayed, or denied by a sheriff who might not share your politics.
A Tax on the Working Class
Let’s not ignore the unspoken truth here: requiring permits is often a financial barrier. The fees, time off work, and scheduling involved disproportionately affect working-class Americans, especially young adults, minorities, and those in rural communities. Constitutional Carry helps level the playing field.
As Paul Valone of Grass Roots North Carolina put it, “We want people to be free of the burden of having to deal with sheriffs who sometimes obstruct permits.” He’s not wrong. Too often, permits are weaponized through delays, arbitrary denials, or selective enforcement.
The Real Issue: Trusting Citizens vs. Controlling Them
Governor Stein’s veto statement read like a playbook of fear: “Teenagers… no training… law enforcement in danger…” But when you look beyond the talking points, you see the real concern: he doesn’t trust the average citizen. And he’s betting that fear will win votes.
But freedom requires responsibility, not permission.
SB 50 would have gone into effect on December 1, 2025. Whether or not the override effort succeeds, the veto itself ensures that gun rights are front and center in North Carolina politics, and that’s not a bad thing.
Because every time a politician tells you that more government makes you safer, it’s a chance for us to remind them: safety starts with you, not a signature on a permit.
For more Second Amendment news and analysis, keep it locked right here on ConcealedCarry.com. Don’t miss updates like this. Join our email newsletter.
This makes regular citizens in n.c. soft targets to those who don’t have a ccp. now criminals have the upper hand,so by any explanation why your reasoning make no sense whatsoever 85 % that have ccp did not complete the mandatory class giving by crooked lawenforcement ,,somme ccp have never shot there weapon in that class but lawenforcement let that slide and issued ccp ,,,yet we have 12 and 13 year brandishing weapons like the wild west that proves that ccp means nothing
Stein is vetoing something the majority of citizens want – what a piece of sh*t!
probably has a lot of friends that teach the course and make money off of it. Just like auto inspections.
As a north carolinian. I blame the voters. How do we get republican led house and senate
A republican lt gov but then vote this joker in..
I think this whole Bill was a ruse. I don’t think Phil Berger and some other Republicans actually want Constitutional Carry to become the law of NC. Why did they wait until now to pass this Bill knowing 100% that it would be vetoed and the votes to override just aren’t there? This Bill should have been passed at the same time the pistol purchase permit was abolished in 2023 – the votes to override a veto existed then – they don’t now. That tells me this whole effort was just disingenuous political chess BS from Phil Berger. When the next Gov. elected is a Republican willing to sign this Bill into law, will Phil Berger push for it’s passing and hand it to the Gov. for a signature? Or will he again spout more horse**** about the “time not being right” for Constitutional Carry in NC? You got played NC – you’re voting for the wrong “Republicans”.
I believe you are correct M.Jones. Here is an excerpt I sent to my legislators in 2024 that may reinforce your supposition.
[ …First, Leader Phil Berger’s comment(*) that, “I just don’t know if there’s a need for us to delve into additional issues dealing with guns and people’s Second Amendment rights.” It appears Mr. Berger needs to actually read the Second Amendment, especially, the phrase, “…shall not be infringed.” Some pertinent synonyms for “infringe” are: undermine, erode, diminish, weaken, limit, and check. To date 28 States disagree with Mr. Burger… ]
Currently, I believe they are going to try to override — I wish them luck, since they will need it.