You are correct!
The current standard, threat to self and others is correct
No new laws are needed, current law keeps firearms out of the hands of those who are a threat to others, my concern, and themselves.
Does it work, no, because the medical and educational communities largely refuse to step up and identify those individuals. No law will correct that.
IMO, I'd prefer to see an alcoholic get treatment, rather than refuse inpatient treatment to maintain his 2nd amendment rights.
The correlation between "mental illness" in the broad sense, and violence is low. Every suburbanite seeing a shrink is not a threat. Any more than every vet seeking VA treatment is. It's political "we have to do something" nonsense. The problem lies with those responsible for enforcing legislation on the books.
Two things that could be done, though I suspect they're largely state issues.
Immunity from lawsuits for professionals making the danger diagnosis.
A timely appeals process to restore 2nd amendment rights. Currently it's a lifetime ban. I'm not sure someone who attempts suicide and is treated deserves a lifetime ban, there should be a reassessment process.
I'll add a third, perhaps for those who are a danger the distinction between involuntary and voluntary admission should be addressed. Currently voluntary falls between the cracks.
Agree with your points. We do need involuntary admission, first for the 72 your assessment, then a longer involuntary stay to assess compliance to any therapy (drug, drug free) that restores “sanity.”
It isn’t “freedom” to leave a four year old on the streets, or a person with Alzheimer’s or untreated schizophrenia. We need to supervise people who can’t be rational enough to be considered an adult.