Before modification by entyti at 17/12/2020 07:24:32 PM
I'm sorry to hear about your father, but Cannoli's point stands: the terrible result of car accidents is not a good reason to close the roads.
38,000 dead in 2019, 4.4 million injured badly enough to need hospitalization.
Or let's take heart disease - 1 in 4 Americans dies of heart disease every year. That's 25% of all deaths. Is that reason to ban red meat, or force people to exercise?
From what I gather, the main difference between car accidents and a virus is the contagion itself and the capacity to spread the virus through the population.
A car accident has a localized foci, and only directly affects those involved in the accident, and indirectly those who have to deal with the outcomes of said accident. Even a major accident won't affect the lives of the people in the next town over (outside of say the family of those involved).
A virus, in contrast, has a foci dependent on the mode of transmission and the behavior of infected individuals. So if someone with the Flu goes shopping, she could infect the guy next to her in the produce aisle, who goes to work the next day at the retirement home, potentially killing grandma and all her Bridge group.
Please note that I don't actually agree with the idea of lockdowns, mask mandates, and business restrictions. I'm actually the asshole who goes maskless to stores and waits until I am asked to put one on. I am simply trying to point out the flaw in the analogy.