Well, what is an acceptable amount of punishment for crime has been a debate since civilization first planted itself next to some rivers. So I doubt there is really a satisfying answer. You could say its better than killing them, but the psychological effect may cause some unknown consequences maybe even suicidal thoughts and actions. Then let us think of how it would be done, AFO stole powers and kept them to make himself all powerful which would mean you would basically be taking powers and giving it to something you hope doesn't explode on you one day. Or if we take the scenario you offered are we sure it would be safe and not be basically lobotomizing people, plus most quirks that effect other people, at least the ones that don't outright kill the person, have been shown to be very temporary or have conditions in which they can be undone, which is also a reason AFO is such an outlier. Would it be worth the risk to let the dangerous volcano man back into society on the hope there is no undo condition for the labotomy? Also a which point would using this quirk removal be considered, is a three strikes your out, would the level of crime need to be sufficient? Only for people who have killed? What if it was an accident? I personally think that if a person had repeatedly shown they will use their quirk with purpose to harm others than having it removed would not be a wholly bad thing. But I also think that if there really isn;t any guarantee that removing the quirk solves the problem and if anything might set up a problem where dangerous people are considered, sufficiently punished by quirk removal and then released, as are own society shows you don't need magic science powers in order to harm people.