But GP's OP is not saying there shouldn't be a line, rather that it is that line that will likely be crossed in guise of public safety to unburden us from the b

But GP's OP is not saying there shouldn't be a line, rather that it is that line that will likely be crossed in guise of public safety to unburden us from the burden of having liberties. Food, water, stuff like that have potential to kill off everyone. Drunk drivers on the other hand are not likely to ever pose an existential threat. So I tend to agree with those who insist that, of course there must be regulation, there must be informed discussion, no we shall not consult the i-ching, but definitely loss of liberties require an exceptionally high public good threshold to be considered. tldr; to keep that line in an optimal space between the extremes, clearly two opposing forces are necessary.