Assuming a ~$200 fan-cooled 5w engraving laser with an excellent collimating lens focused at infinity, 1mrad divergence, the irradiance would fall off within 500m to a level below any permanent harm (let alone permanent damage in less than a second). This is by the FAA's very conservative standard of 2.5mW/cm^2, which is about 1/50th of the irradiance of direct sunlight. Within 500m, you'd need to be able to aim the beam very precisely to maintain the narrow cone of light to within 1mrad of the victim's pupil. Your hands are too shaky, you'd need something like a motorized telescope mount with active tracking.
The risks pilots bear when assholes shine bright lights at their windshield are distraction, glare and temporary 'flashblindness', where your rods and cones lose their low-light adaptation as they adjust to the briefly intense brightness level, and gradually recover over 10s of seconds. These are real risks, but it's not 30km lightsaber beams frying pilots' retinas for $3.99.
This is great when you are using a laser yourself as you can just get glasses that block the wavelength of your laser. It's better than nothing for pilots, since you can block against 1 or 2 of the most common wavelengths.
However if a particular wavelength were standard for protective eyewear, then an attacker would just get a different wavelength.
Could have multiple cams, some of which might have shielding in different directions, with the screens showing a composite-image from the cams that seem to be working well.
Even a poorly-designed system that accidentally shows a laser should at least not hurt the pilots, as the screens wouldn't be able to show anything brighter than white-pixels. Sorta like how someone flashing a laser-pointer in your eyes over a video-call can't actually hurt your eyes.
Though a well-designed system ought to be able to maintain a pretty reliable view outside, allowing the pilots to still see outside even while they're actively being hit.
Or, maybe allow the pilots to rotate the screens away to reveal windows in the event of an electrical/computer problem. But primarily as a backup -- presumably an augmented-reality display that's protected from issues like laser-attacks would be the preference when everything's working right.
Or.. I guess pilots could get augmented-reality glasses/helmets with their own cameras to do the same in modern aircraft, if it's a major problem in the short-term. Perhaps not as robust in the absence of externally-mounted cameras on the plane itself, and perhaps not quite as comfortable if the glasses/helmet are bulky.
An additional solution implementing electronics could be equipping all windows and possibly other areas on the craft with sensors which sound an alarm the instant any laser light is detected so that the pilots become aware of the problem before it takes its effect. Having two pilots and an autopilot also helps with this but this does nothing for most single pilot aircraft.
I really don't want a regulatory eye turned towards lasers, at least during a media cycle. Determined assholes will just take apart their BDR players. It'll stop most kids I guess, but I think more media coverage could lead to more behaviour like this.
I dont particularly think we need new laws though, intentionally hurting someone is already illegal. The mechanism shouldn't matter.