[daenz]

Seat belts and helmets do not require chemicals to be injected into your bloodstream in order to freely associate with other humans. These measures change free association by making it illegal to exist naturally around others. There is a huge difference.

[EForEndeavour]

Yeah, but cars don't hitch rides in your lungs and jump into nearby people's mouths, occasionally injuring them.

[daenz]

Based on that reasoning we should ban free association because people randomly assault others occasionally too.

[EForEndeavour]

Well, no, which is why we don't mandate vaccines against viruses which don't cause once-in-a-century pandemics. But that's separate from what I wanted to respond to, which was the false equivalence between seatbelts/helmets and vaccines.

[daenz]

The new authoritarian infrastructure that we put in place in order to "combat the pandemic" will live long after the pandemic, and negatively affect the lives of everyone going forward. Governments do not have a track record of giving up power.

Telling people to stay indoors if they're scared is much more preferable to injecting government into every aspect of our lives.

Also I'm not sure why you're mentioning false equivalence to me, since I am also highlighting the false equivalence between vaccines and seat belts.

[EForEndeavour]

Sorry, you're right, and in that sense we're on the same side: I shouldn't have written "false equivalence." I meant to point out that your objection of "well, seatbelts don't require you to inject chemicals into your body, so there's a huge difference" is irrelevant precisely because there is a huge difference between the bad outcome that seatbelts prevent the bad outcome that vaccines prevent.