It appears in general that the only people that do not understand the rules are the ones that do not want to be restricted by them...
Well said!
The rules and the reason for them have always been quite clear to me.
This virus is voracious in its infection rate and to balance the limitations of healthcare some form of quarantine is required.
You could go all out lockdown for a short period and spray ethanol on anything (that is resistant to ethanol) that people come into contact with.
The problem with that is the economic impact and people starving to death because there is no one making/selling/delivering food. Clearly this is not an option. Therefore anything else is a compromise that will inevitably allow the virus to continue finding a host albeit at a reduced rate.
The compromises are thus, where possible (reasonable) stay two meters apart, wear a face covering (preferably eyes also), don’t use public transport, stay away from shared spaces, work from home (again, if it’s feasible).
Going to school, taking in deliveries, shopping, going to work etcetera all increase the risks. The risks can only be reduced and the requirement is to reduce this to an acceptable level.
The things were not allowed to do/have to do are somewhat offset by the things we are still allowed/are required to do.
If we took the opposite stance of do nothing, the the virus would spread rapidly, the deaths per day would go up (though the percentage of infections to deaths would remain largely the same or arguably even fall slightly) and the demands on healthcare would be very damaging.
In places where lockdown is very relaxed or even almost non existent, they typically are in regions/countries of low population density.
Of course there are the tin foil hat brigade who say its all a government/big Pharma scam. Perhaps they could have told my father that had he not died as a result of a severe respiratory infection i.e. Covid-19