Where We Stand:

Time to set reasonable gun limits.

After a crime as monstrous and devastating as Sunday’s night’s massacre in Las Vegas — with 58 killed and more than 500 injured — it’s not enough for federal and state lawmakers to express sympathy for the victims. Public safety is a primary responsibility at all levels of government. So lawmakers have a moral obligation to do more to prevent Americans from falling victim to gun violence.

While it might be questionable whether some familiar gun-safety proposals would have stopped this or other specific incidents, the overall impact of America’s lax gun laws compared with the rest of the world is harder to dispute. The gun homicide rate in the U.S. between 2010 and 2015 was more than five times higher than it was across the northern border in Canada, and 16 times higher than it was in Germany.

The U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment guarantees Americans the right to keep and bear arms, but it doesn’t preclude reasonable limits on guns, according to no less an authority than the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Here are just three measures worthy of action from federal and/or state lawmakers:

Banning bump stocks. Federal law makes it illegal to own automatic weapons, which can fire a stream of bullets with each trigger pull, unless they were manufactured before 1986 and the owner has obtained a federal license for them. Yet the arsenal of at least 23 firearms assembled in a hotel room by the Las Vegas shooter, Stephen Paddock, included semiautomatic rifles modified for rapid fire to simulate automatic weapons. It’s ridiculous that equipment to do the conversion, including “bump stocks” and trigger cranks, can be legally purchased.

Passing a bill in Congress to ban such equipment — the Senate co-sponsors include Florida Democrat Bill Nelson — is a no-brainer. Otherwise, the ban on automatic weapons is almost pointless.

Universal background checks. It’s true that Paddock reportedly bought numerous guns legally from a gun store. He managed to clear federal background checks; apparently he didn’t have a criminal record or a history of mental illness that would have blocked him from buying his weapons. He didn’t need to take advantage of the loophole that allows purchasers of firearms at gun shows or in private transactions to evade background checks.

That means universal background checks wouldn’t have stopped Paddock. But that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t stop other would-be mass murderers. Law-enforcement groups have endorsed universal background checks. Polls indicate they enjoy broad support among Americans. They are a minor inconvenience for law-abiding gun owners, but would make it harder for people with criminal backgrounds and mental-health problems to get their hands on firearms.

Banning high-capacity ammunition magazines. When Congress let a federal ban on assault weapons expire in 2004 after a decade, a ban on high-capacity magazines expired along with it. Assault weapons are even more lethal in crowds and against cops when equipped with magazines that let shooters fire off dozens of bullets before reloading. Someone intending to hunt or protect his home with a semiautomatic rifle doesn’t need a 30-round magazine to do it.

While the chances are remote that Congress would consider reviving the 1994 federal ban — the majority wasn’t moved to do so after last year’s Pulse shooting — two Democratic state legislators from Orlando, Sen. Linda Stewart and Rep. Carlos Guillermo Smith, have reintroduced proposals for a similar ban in Florida. Their bills didn’t even get a hearing in the 2017 legislative session; they are overdue for a full and open examination and discussion in committee in 2018. If legislators want to block the bill, let them go on the record voting against it.

There’s plenty more that federal and state lawmakers can do to reduce gun violence, including expand the availability of mental-health services. Families, schools, churches and the entertainment industry also have constructive roles to play in helping to solve this complex societal problem.

But after another atrocity committed by a lone gunman wielding his own high-powered arsenal and murdering dozens of innocent people, it’s irresponsible for lawmakers to rule out reasonable gun limits.