“high profile tragedies in Milwaukee”
.
There haven't been any.
-
How about high profile tragedies in Slinger, MKEGal. Evidently, the fact an unarmed young man was shot to death by a homeowner doesn't count as a tragedy. It's appalling that some individuals have such little regard for human life. Your attempt to compare a vehicle purchase to a gun purchase is completely illogical. Many items can "kill" if used incorrectly but why shouldn't the intended purpose of the item determine how it's commerce is regulated? Background checks should be performed on all individuals buying a gun no matter how the gun is obtained. Your argument against law enforcement using a database to determine who has a conceal carry permit is feeble as well. It's ludicrous to think law enforcement treat every person as though that individual is carrying a loaded weapon. I firmly believe gun ownership should be legal but I totally disagree with the general lack of oversight. Those who do not provide for proper storage of their weapons by keeping them locked and unloaded should be held accountable for crimes committed or deaths attributed to their carelessness. Civic rights come a sense of responsibility. If your intentions are indeed to be law abiding, then the law is not a burden.

“lack of access to records of permit [sic] holders” for law enforcement
“it would be beneficial for us to know who is potentially CCW when we have contact with them”
.
Why would it be beneficial?
Seriously, why?
.
They should be approaching all situations with the idea that the person may be armed, and watching for signs that the person may be dangerous.
(They're not the same thing. I am usually armed, but rarely dangerous. If you behave like a civilized human being we'll get along just fine. Try to harm me and you will probably not like the results.)
.
If my car is being driven by someone else, would they treat him more harshly in a traffic stop just because the car is registered to me & I'm a licensee? (Hint: that would be commmitting a crime, & the officers can go to jail... as prisoners.)
What if my neighbor's car were stolen. She's not a licensee, but maybe the people who stole it are armed and dangerous & would love to kill a cop. Would they approach with less caution?
.
Besides, they can't know someone's license status until they have reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime being committed, which lets them legally try to ID someone, and they can't know who the person is until after contact.

re: changing training requirements
.
Same argument as before, about controlling good citizens instead of criminals.
Add to that the states which have Constitutional Carry (no government interference in the right to self-protection), and the states which do not require training to get a license or permit.
Those states do not have a higher rate of problems with law-abiding citizens which could have been influenced by training than do the states which require training of any sort.

“dealing with background check loopholes and firearm surrender issues”
.
While I agree there should be some way to enforce a “no guns” order from a judge, I'm guessing whoever wrote this has never tried to buy a gun from a dealer. There are no “loopholes” to close. No matter where you buy a gun from a dealer they have to do the same useless background check and wait the same 48 hours. If you buy property from a private citizen, whether it's a gun or a car (which are used to kill many times more people than guns are), no background check is allowed. You read that right. Not allowed.
And if I sell a car to someone, I don't check to see if their license has been revoked. (If they want to take it for a test drive, I'll see that they have one that appears to be valid.)
.
Besides, how would requiring background checks on private property transfers stop crime? Do you really think that criminals would go to a gun store or police station & fill out the paperwork? They're already ignoring laws with serious punishments, things like armed robbery, murder, and in many cases state & federal laws saying they're not allowed to have firearms or ammunition. Why would breaking one more law bother them?
.
Laws only control people who are law-abiding. Criminals don't follow laws, & criminals are the ones causing problems. We don't punish the majority of drivers who drive responsibly & safely because some moronic football player in Texas drove drunk & killed someone. Why punish the majority of firearms owners who are responsible because of some criminals?

“high profile tragedies in Milwaukee”
.
There haven't been any. There was an armed citizen who stopped an armed robbery of a clerk at a grocery store, and there was an armed citizen who stopped an armed robbery / murder against himself, and there was the armed citizen who probably stopped a street robbery or abduction of himself & his wife by a man in a van. Those are only the ones that made the evening news.
.
The Sikh temple shooting was in Oak Creek.
The Azana salon shooting was in Brookfield, and as your article mentioned their door had a sign refusing entry to law-abiding citizens who are lawfully armed, yet the mass murderer came in & killed people anyway.