> I'm just telling you that you dont need everyone to agree with you to get herd immunity effects.

Agreed.

And you've suggested I track down and pay some of the people I come in contact with, who have not vaccinated, to convince them to vaccinate, if I think the percentage of them is too high?

> In drunk driving, you are harming someone. In not vaccinating, you are not protecting someone.

Walking around, spreading a disease, is analogous to getting in a car's driver seat when you're drunk. If you want to avoid driving drunk, don't get drunk, or don't drive.

If you want to avoid spreading a disease, get a vaccine.

Also, drunk driving is NOT harming someone. It has increased the risk you will harm someone, to a level our government has deemed unacceptable.

The analogy seems very appropriate.

Do you want me to go around finding people with a certain blood alcohol level, and pay them to not drive?

Our laws bar drunks from driving. That can actually be a life-or-death situation for them, or cause severe financial harm. "I need to get where I'm going for my job, and I don't have any money, but I'm inebriated."

We use force against people who are drunk, because they increase the risk of harm. We detain them in jails, we put them in prisons, we rescind their privilege to drive.

That's a lot of force being used against someone who didn't even cause any harm!

> When you do it successfully, please send me proof and Ill gladly share your story with the world. I'd like to see you try doing this. Until then, talk is talk.

If it's the law, and they need people to help enforce it, I may do my service. As my father was a veteran, my uncle is a veteran, my grandfather was a veteran, etc, serving your country and doing things that are not universally beloved is something my family has done.

> It's merely an effect of vaccines.

...and arguably the most important thing humanity has done. It's a shame to watch people abandon it pointlessly, endangering those around them.

> Albeit some arguments about kids, babies and dogs, but to adults its generally in most cases, illegal to force it.

We're not debating whether is IS legal, we're discussing whether it should be. It's not like I'm unaware of the law.

You seem to question the basis of a government using force. Governments do use force, that's all I'm saying.

> Government is not supposed to be the way you force other people to do your will.

It's how we compromise to live together. Intelligent creatures change their environment to suit them. We will all attempt to force other people to do our will.

I think governments should enforce Intellectual Property rights. That means the government will use force to take property away from you, if it is found to be infringing someone else's government-granted monopoly.

That is me using the government to force other people to do my will.

> That is a tyranny.

Tyranny is when you don't have a vote, don't have representation, can't speak your view, and can't move.

It's entirely possible for you to lose faith in the government. Any government. And then you could reasonably see the laws of that government as tyranny. There's nothing illogical about that. But literally anyone can declare that at any time.

> If 51% vote to enslave the other 49%, a disservice to mankind was made.

Which is why it's great that our government protects us from exactly that kind of vote. We can debate whether it protects us well enough.

NB: Our Constitution permitted slavery. It took a bloody Civil War to change that. People fought the righteous fight to end slavery. To a degree, we have to count on our government and our fellow man to protect us from being enslaved.

> Thats why the modern governments are democracies with severe limitations on individual rights.

I'm not sure where you're going with this. I presume you think that's a bad thing.

> willing to break into the employers home

Why would you go there?

Don't you believe in Free Association?

If my employer wants to limit employment only to people who have been vaccinated, are you going to argue they don't have that freedom?

Regardless, I'm betting you use vaccines, and you just enjoy moral / legal debates. That's fine.

Or are you really personally against using vaccines?