The Dallas shootings give Californians reason to take a closer look at the six new gun control bills signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown on July 1.

They won’t make us instantly safer. But they are a good step in what should be a decades-long campaign to change the state’s gun culture.

Dallas made it clear that widespread guns and open carry laws aren’t the answer. There were armed citizens among the peaceful demonstrators, carrying rifles. Yet five police officers died.

This has to be an evolution, and it has to be based on independent research of what works and what doesn’t work. That’s why a University of California firearms violence research center approved by lawmakers in June will be important: $5 million is allocated for research on the impact of gun violence and of state laws intended to curb it.

Gun research should be a bipartisan cause. In fact, the National Rifle Association should welcome it if it believes regulation makes people less safe. But Congress has refused to authorize federal agencies to study the effects of gun violence, which the American Medical Association calls a public health epidemic. California can lead the way.

The most significant action in the six-bill package Brown just signed makes California the first state to require background checks to buy ammunition. The legislation also bans high-capacity magazines — and requires people to turn in ones they already own — as well as banning “bullet buttons,” which make it easy for shooters to detach magazines and quickly reload.

The NRA, prone to hyperbole, calls the new laws “draconian” and “Stalin-esque.” None threatens the right of law-abiding citizens to own weapons, but the organization does have a legitimate point about one element. It outlaws lending guns to anyone but immediate family members without having the borrower go through a background check. Previously, guns could be loaned between people who are personally known to each other for as long as 30 days without a background check.

The change is a direct response to crimes like the San Bernardino mass shooting in which the guns were purchased legally by one person and then lent to a killer. It clarifies responsibility for how your gun is used. But hunters commonly loan guns to friends to try them out. It’s part of the sport.

The Legislature should look at whether this law can be tweaked to make it clear that lending guns will be prosecuted only when a crime is committed with one. That way friends will know they’re taking personal responsibility for legal use of their firearms but aren’t subject to arrest for letting a pal try out a new hunting rifle.

Brown vetoed bills that would have limited purchases of long guns to one a month, made gun theft a felony, required speedier reporting of lost or stolen guns, made gun violence restraining orders available to more groups and attempted to curb the proliferation of “ghost guns” without serial numbers. His rationale was reasonable.

The legislative package did not convince Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom to drop his Proposition 63 from the November ballot, since it goes farther to regulate guns. It will require intense scrutiny this fall because if it passes, and unforeseen problems arise with its enforcement, voter-approved laws are almost impossible to fix. By contrast, laws passed by the Legislature can more easily be tweaked, as we’ve suggested with the gun-lending law.

Mass shootings and gun violence are escalating. California has an obligation to try to stem that tide while protecting the rights of its law-abiding gun owners. The Legislature has approached this responsibly — especially since it has had the foresight to sponsor independent study of the results.