In such a system in which there are no real ideological struggles and conflicts for wayward, sociopathic men to throw themselves into, in such an environment where the world-at-large is obsessed with small and minor little technical problems, going postal is really all the more you can expect when a convictionless, faithless basket case has an episode.
That "going postal" is a byproduct of these many successes, marginal in scale and ultimately just another little technical problem to solve. I would consider these shooters to be an externality of the rise of the internet and onward march of technology into the human mind.
We have not properly integrated this modern tech-infused landscape of ours into society in any meaningful way. It is clear that guns + internet can lead to happenings like this - so what, ban guns, like most of Europe? Ban the internet instead? I mean, there's a right to firearms and no such right for the internet, so the correct answer answer should be clear... No,
obviously you shouldn't ban either.
This is an extreme outside case that kills and maims fewer people than cow-tipping does on a yearly basis. Distill what the average shooter is like, narrow in on and address their concerns, looney bin the ones that can't be therapized and medicated to a state of complacency, and implement safe-guards against bad actors that try to rile them up.
No seismic shifts are required, the liberal order was built to last. By nature and definition it can and must integrate these technological changes, not reject them or abuse them. We are just currently slow-walking that process, since most politicians are so old and detached they see the root of the problem as new and alien and do not comprehend where to begin. The cycle will turn over to the young and then the bigger war will be fought and, by design, the most decent and uncontroversial answers will win out.
On the topic of bad actors riling up sociopaths, tamping down on the media "crisis reporting" is a great start. The United States has an extremely long and unique history with yellow or sensational journalism.
The fact that this shooter was Filipino is particularly relevant... There is also a strong element of desire to be a public figure for most shooters, with all of these sociopathic losers invariably aping for attention or trying to share their manifesto. That's an honor which the average US media coverage is only too happy to provide, and in doing so they provide a narrative that shootings and shooters are common, a normal result of US domestic policy alone, and you should be worried about them, none of which is true.
Regardless of if the interventions or policy changes driven by yellow journalism are correct or incorrect, they invariably cause US citizens a headache. There are things you can report in other countries that don't even make people blink, but you report them in the US and that lead to every man, woman, and child here calling for a new holy war.
Televised/digital journalism is uncharted territory, if you think a few decades is enough to set "responsible standards" when it took thousands of years to metastasize
honest journalism you're retarded, so it's simply another factor of those tech externalities that should be addressed.