Lisa Price is executive director of the North Carolinians Against Gun Violence Education Fund.

We who work to prevent gun violence fervently hope that the deadliest campus shooting in U.S. history will move lawmakers to impose some of the laws that are so effective in other nations.

After shootings like those at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., in 1996, or the Amish schoolhouse in Nickel Mines, Pa., last fall, the public expresses outrage. Polls consistently show that two-thirds of Americans favor stricter gun laws. Yet most legislators vote against new gun laws, because they fear the power of the gun lobby to defeat them in elections.

The U.S. has more guns per capita and much more gun violence than other developed nations, which have strict licensing and registration laws or bans on certain types of guns. When a gunman killed 16 students and a teacher in Dunblane, Scotland, in 1996, Great Britain outlawed private possession of handguns. In the U.S., about 290 million firearms are in private hands, and nearly 30,000 Americans die every year from gun violence. Other countries are appalled.

It is not enough to talk about SWAT teams and security checks after a massacre. We must talk about prevention. We can and we must fix our pitiful patchwork of laws that allow criminals, youths and the dangerous mentally ill easy access to guns. We can enact more effective laws without preventing access for responsible citizens.

Since Columbine, it has been easier than ever to obtain guns. Many states passed laws that undermined local governments' attempts to impose stricter gun laws. Laws permitting people to carry concealed guns multiplied. Congress forbade the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to inspect gun stores adequately or release data on corrupt gun dealers to law enforcement and others.

Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech assailant, easily passed the Brady computerized, instant background check and obtained a deadly, rapid-fire handgun. But in 2005, he was adjudicated mentally ill and institutionalized as a danger to himself and others. This would have barred him from obtaining the gun, but Virginia, like many states, did not enter such information into the instant check system.

North Carolina goes beyond the Brady instant checks. Individuals seeking handgun permits must undergo a sheriff's background check that takes several days. Knowing about the assailant's mental illness would have stopped the sale. Were the federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004, still in effect, ammunition clips that hold more than 10 bullets would not have been available.

Several steps can be taken to greatly reduce access to guns by the wrong people. These include licensing gun owners and registering firearms; requiring thorough, universal background checks for all gun purchases, including those at gun shows; requiring that lost or stolen guns be reported to authorities to help stop traffickers; and tracing all guns used in crimes, to identify gun traffickers and straw buyers, people who buy for someone who is ineligible to purchase. We need laws to define safe storage so children and teens cannot access guns at home. We should also limit handgun purchases to one a month to discourage trafficking. The list goes on and on.

The U.S. must face up to its terrible gun problem. The public must rise up and demand that lawmakers have the courage to defy the gun lobby and pass effective gun laws.