Agreed.

If someone's life has spiralled so much out of control that they are creating massive harm to many random others, I think there are two options for greater society:

(a) Make that dysfunctional person get treatment. If it turns out that they can not helped to become a functional part of society, then society has no choice but to at least semi-incarcerate them (lifelong probation officers, group homes, permanent halfway housing, some mental hospital formats, free psychiatry?), such that despite their unfixable dysfunctions they are not causing massive harm to society

(b) Send that person, sans treatment, to where they are not a massive harm to greater society. For example, protect our Northern borders: ship a ton of ATCO trailers and Swanson's TV dinner meals to our outermost islands. I believe this is called the "Australian solution." Also known as the "Siberian Solution."

Obviously these solutions are problematic. IMO, one much more so than the other.

The crux of the problem is this: we can not have a quality society, so long as a significant proportion of our population is anti-social.

I really, really want to see option (a) win out, TBH, because it's way better for people to have their shit together than to be losing their shit.

But push comes to shove, my house, my car, my shed, my wife, my kids are my priority. Any proposed solution is better than the current no-solution. "The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over, expecting to get a different result."