It's difficult to know what "tougher gun control" can really do. In hunting circumstances, people get shot because of a moment of unbelievable stupidity. It is interesting that, in obtaining a firearms licence, you have to meet strict requirements in terms of home security. You also are subject to a background check. But your ability to use a firearm properly is pretty much left up to fate.
I wonder, when it comes to hunting, whether it would be a good idea to have a certain number of hours logged in practical experience, like a pilot, and signed off by a reputable person, before a full licence is issued.
I also think a firearms licence renewed every five years is an idea with merit.
Regarding dog attacks, the oft-repeated line is: licence the owners, not the dog.
It does sound a good idea. I believe it is absolutely true that there's a large collection of dysfunctional people out there who happen to own dogs and are useless at it. A dog is a high-maintenance animal. The difficulty is, do councils or police have the resources to inspect and process everyone who wants to own a dog?