Because they feel "unsafe" when such conditions obtain?

Isn't this the same premise for "locking down" the world – and imposing various restrictions on who may go where?

Almost no one is actually sick – or rather, seriously sick (being occasionally, mildly sick was formerly regarded as a normal part of everyday life, before society became sick) and only an attenuated minority – the very old and the very already-unhealthy – have ever been in any serious peril from this sickness. And yet, on the basis of the fragility of the very few – enhanced by the unreasoning fear of the many – the entire world was "locked down" and perfectly healthy, perfectly sane people still face restrictions on where they may go, under what conditions, imposed by  . . . the people down the street or across the way.

Your neurotic neighbors.

Why not apply the same premise to who is allowed to drive – and when? Some people are "at risk" – after dark, in the fog. If it snows. They cannot see very well. They cannot drive very well. For the good of the community – and to show respect – shouldn't we all stay home after dark, or if it's foggy?

When it might snow?

If i sounds far-fetched, consider how far things have gone, already. The healthy are expected to live in perpetual dread of a sickness that doesn't threaten them; a sickness most of them haven't got – or have gotten over. They are being pressured to submit to what is supposedly a "treatment" for this sickness which does not ail them – for the sake of the community.