Yes...I remember the tragedy with the hikers....and the fact that this guy should not have been able to try it again.

In trying to work out in my own head how it should have been handled, I sometimes compare it to autos & drunk/impaired driving.
Some people should not be allowed to drive, even when NOT impaired....when they ARE drunk, it is much worse. But unless they are in prison, it is hard to keep them totally away from cars. Everyday we go onto the roads knowing that someone dangerous might be on the same roads. We take our chances....and most of us just drive normally and take reasonable care. We don't armor our cars like 'some' need to. We don't equip them with James Bond defensive devices....etc. We instead hope that the 'system' has kept a large % of dangerous folks OUT of our concerns: knowing that it is always possible we will be a sad statistic.
   It is not reasonable to ban vehicles...or even limit driving to some tiny % who 'need' cars.....but we can & do limit certain types of vehicles and restrict where they can be driven and are beginning to provide codes and other safeguards to make it harder for unauthorized persons to even start a vehicle.
   What I do not see is much in the way of similar attempts to control firearms, which are not needed be nearly as many folks as need cars.

So, unless *I* am willing and able to take special training in firearms, I will continue to not add to the list of those who have guns and limited ability to use them, and just 'take my chances' that I will NOT encounter an idiot with a gun....as I have for over 50 years as an adult so far.

   I seriously FEAR a law like Texas is proposing, for all those who might carry a gun on campus will, no doubt, carry it off-campus also, and just increase the number of guns in the population and the odds that a few of them will misuse the privilege or 'carry while impaired'...etc.

I still have not read why someone lobbied to be allowed to bring loaded guns into National Parks, and what they think it gains.