Exactly. They get far too free a pass on that.
In fact, one could argue that public safety should fall under "legitimate purpose" rather than "compelling interest". My concern is that "compelling interest" gives them carte blanche to limit/violate constitutional rights in pursuit of a nanny-state, which is bad. "Legitimate purpose" would seem to say that, yes, they have a responsibility to work in the interests of public safety, so long as they can do so with minimal negative impact on our rights, but leaves the people more powerful (and accountable) in protecting themselves; they can't claim government is supposed to be protecting them from every microscopic imagined or manufactured risk.
Sort of the risk-mitigation facet of "The government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have"