Absolutely not. Here is why:
1) It makes it all about the guns and not about the danger this guy might be to society EVEN WITHOUT A GUN.
2) What should be happening is one of four things:
A) He should be in jail awaiting trial on his attempted murder charges. (If a judge during bail hearing finds him to be a risk). His right to a gun will be temporarily denied (among many other rights of people in jail). NOTE: No specific banned-from-having-a-gun-list is necessary, he's in jail.
B) He should be in prison, after being convicted of some charge. (Again, rights denied based on being in prison)
C) He should be out on parole. A possible CONDITION OF PAROLE would be not to be in possession of a gun OR OTHER WEAPONS. There could be other conditions depending on the individual case. Don't like the conditions? Then don't get out on parole.
D) He should be free (not in jail, not in prison, not on parole), whether pre-trial, post trial (not guilty), or after completing his sentence. Once free, he should have all of his rights back.
This is what SHOULD happen. I know current law provides for denial of gun ownership to persons previously convicted of felony. I don't believe in that.