Lasers start fires which can get out of control and destroy cities. Pistols do not.
Lasers leave scorch marks. Pistols leave bullets with serial numbers imprinted on them, and can often be matched to guns regardless of that.
Lasers can be plugged into wall sockets. Pistols require you to go to stores to purchase ammo and powder, leaving a paper trail.
Modern lasers are 600 years old. Pistols have been around for nearly 2,000 years. Modern lasers require factories. Pistols can be home-made by any dedicated technician.
It is more difficult to make an object more restricted than it is to make it less restricted. Pistols have had nearly 2,000 years to have one generation of politicians make them easier to acquire, only to have the next generation struggle an up-hill battle to make them harder to acquire again. Lasers, having a much shorter history, do not have this problem: there's been a much smaller span of time for politicians to lower their legal rating.
Lasers are in low demand. Though cool, they are expensive, difficult to maintain, don't have a nostalgic classy feel and are difficult to aim due to their instantaneous, invisible beam. Therefore, there's not a very large lobby pushing to have them made more acquirable.
Pistols, on the other hand, are cheap, easy to maintain, and popular. Therefore, even if politicians want them outlawed, there's simply too large of a voting/gun-toting lobby to take those gun rights away.
Just my $0.02