Search Results: extreme act

While I wouldn't support either I would argue that a total lockdown is the less extreme of the two options. I mean some people would argue that this would be a complete deprivation of personal liberties but for a significant portion of the population, the opposite end would mean that they couldn't go out to perform essential tasks without a much greater chance of contracting a deadly disease and dying. Now, this would be a much greater deprivation of personal liberties than a lock-down.

That's right libertarians, your big government boogeyman isn't the only thing that can take away your personal freedoms. Now you could argue that no one is stopping you from going out when there's a pandemic, but no one is stopping you from going outside during a lock-down. The government imposes consequences for that (i. e. fines and incarceration) but the virus also imposes consequences for doing so during a pandemic (getting sick and possibly dying).