If these were private matters affecting only particular individuals as a consequence of their particular decisions, then yes, I would broadly be open to allowin

If these were private matters affecting only particular individuals as a consequence of their particular decisions, then yes, I would broadly be open to allowing private choices. But it's not. Folks breaking shelter-in-place orders impose a non-trivial risk on everyone else. This is a classic externality problem and the classic answer, if a market mechanism cannot be formed, is regulation. Since viruses don't respect cap-and-trade schemes, we are stuck with what we have and we should absolutely punish those who impose substantial risks (2% is absurdly high, are you kidding?) on the rest of us against our will.