I've seen this chain of reasoning a few times from different people now, and I have no idea how it follows: "someone broke a rule, so we have to throw out all t

I've seen this chain of reasoning a few times from different people now, and I have no idea how it follows: "someone broke a rule, so we have to throw out all the rules now." The claim that lockdowns are somehow invalid now just says that, since we have experienced some setbacks on epidemic controls, we must throw epidemic controls out the window. I'm not seeing the logical connection. If a medical patient misses a dose of medication, doctors don't stop treating the patient. We couldn't stop protests from happening. We've tried gassing the protestors, yelling at them, shooting them, beating them, and pushing them around with cars and riot shields, and those control measures haven't been completely successful. We may also have some legal protections for this kind of activity, I think. And if the plight of people who live in daily fear of being curb-stomped or killed by the police is the same as your desire for a haircut, either your haircuts are very expensive or your well-being is only worth $20.