"Tangentially related?" Maybe, but useful nonetheless . . . . That sounds utterly heartless, so let me clarify. This is a tragic event from which the family may never recover. From a "legal tactics" perspective, it's useful in a demonstrative sense: as to why vesting discretion in law enforcement to determine who may and may not arm themselves is a bad idea.
Here's my thinking: Didn't the sheriff deny Woolard's application because Woolard "hadn't demonstrated an immediate need" (or some such language) for a firearm or a CCL? Isn't Dawn, the estranged wife whom Abbot assaulted likely Woolard's daughter? The police thought that Woolard had failed to show that this very person posed enough of a threat to allow Woolard to arm himself. Yet a couple of years down the road, Abbot has assaulted his wife, beaten his parents, and taken his own life. His mother is reported to have been transported to a hospital for serious injuries. Had he decided to take his anger out on Woolard, who knows?
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.