I doubt either of us would be pleased with the results, regardless. Except the UT Tower shootings rt referenced, I recall no Columbines prior to 1999, since which they have become alarmingly common. It is certainly suggestive all perpetrators were born in the '80s or '90s, when mentally ill shooters became increasingly common even as gun control became increasingly strict. Perhaps the rest were before my time, but I also recall no John Hinckleys, Mark David Chapmans or David Berkowitzes prior to the Son of Sam murders. We certainly do not want the merely eccentric forcibly confined (let alone lobotomized,) but can just as certainly strike a better balance between that and allowing hordes of the dangerously deranged to run free, get guns and kill.

That said, it may not be as simple as tighter restrictions on involuntary commitment. Another growing phenomenon of our lifetime is equating community with communism, government with tyranny and anarchy with freedom. Even in the '70s sociologists and psychologists warned the resulting isolated alienation would breed loners enraged at a society they feel (rightly, to a great extent) abandoned them. If we insist everyone is on their own, society only formalized competition with no pity for losers, is it surprising some losers try to vengefully and violently settle the score with whomever is handy? We cannot expect them to value the fellow human lives we define as foes. When calls for public aid meet shouts of "LET THEM DIE!" those in need will naturally respond, "you first...." It is as certain as it is wrong.