On Wednesday, August 27th, the Annunciation Catholic School shooting in Minneapolis marked the United States’ most recent school shooting. With over 57 school shootings having taken place just this year, America’s ongoing challenge with mass amounts of yearly school shootings cannot be ignored.

The biggest debate happens amongst the ways in which we can work towards solving this devastating issue. One popular side says we should be arming teachers and staff while the other calls for tighter firearm regulations. Both solutions would mean changing government policies.

Arming teachers and Staff: Pros

There are already several states in the U.S. who have legislation that allow teachers to carry firearms in the classroom, though not all schools in these states have teachers who do. Legislation allowing teachers to carry, let the schools, who then speak with parents, decide whether or not they want firearms on campus.

Schools who do have teachers and staff storing firearms on campus are able to save money while also increasing security measures. Instead of spending extra money to hire more police officers and security guards to help with safety measures, schools put some safety into the hands of certain teachers. Furthermore, this measure aims to give classrooms with firearms a fighting chance in emergency situations.

Arming teachers and Staff: Cons

Even though the intentions behind arming teachers and staff is meant to improve safety measures, the presence of a firearm automatically increases the risk that it will be used and that an incident will become more violent. In fact, it can even increase the power school shooters have by providing more ammunition.

This solution may save money for the school, but unfortunately it does the opposite for teachers. It puts the cost and training in their hands. Teachers will be putting their lives more at risk when wielding their own firearm at the sign of an emergency situation, especially when intruders have more experience with firearms. Moreover, allowing teachers and staff to carry is not a preventative measure and does nothing to stop those who will attack. In the end, it is possible for the school and its teachers to become liable for injuries in lawsuit cases depending on the related state laws.

More Strict Firearm Regulations: Pros

More strict firearm regulations can do a lot of good. Regulations that raise the purchasing age, restrict those with a history of mental health issues from purchasing, and ban high capacity magazines are all limitations that can work towards preventing school shootings. By restricting the amount and the type of people allowed to carry firearms, we can also restrict the number of gun related deaths and incidents altogether.

More Strict Firearm Regulations: Cons

Many of those who argue against tighter regulations worry about the government’s control and whether or not enforcing certain regulations will end up giving the government too much power. This is especially the case for regulations involving licensing, microstamping, and any firearm tracking efforts. Those who oppose these specific regulations are worried it will become a violation of privacy.

What Are Other Countries Doing?

Other countries like Canada, Australia, and even Israel have chosen to make legislative actions that create more strict firearm regulations. In response to the Montreal massacre, Canada enacted a ban on high-capacity magazines for semi-automatic weapons and a 28-day waiting period for purchasing that includes extensive background checks and a national registration system. Later on, Canada additionally banned over 1,500 assault style weapons completely. Australia has completely banned semi-automatic and pump-action firearms along with enacting several other safety measures including having a centralized registry of gun owners.

Israel has even more rigorous regulations on firearms. To be able to buy a gun in Israel you need a government license and the requirements to obtain a license are strict. You need to be at least 27 years old, have passed a gun-safety test, and be in possession of a letter from a doctor clearing you of any mental health issues. The process is known to be severely selective and many applicants are often rejected even if they meet the requirements. After obtaining a license, most are still restricted to only buying one gun with a limit of around 50 bullets.

While these countries haven’t entirely stopped mass shootings, the reforms they have put into place have reduced them to rare occurrences and aided in fostering safer environments both inside and outside of schools.

Unfortunately, these solutions ultimately don’t change the root of the issue. Those who want to cause violence will find ways to do so. Looking to these other countries for reference, it seems as though strict regulations are one way we can successfully work toward decreasing the amount of shootings in the United States. It may not stop every devastating event, but it is a step in the right direction.