Why are these actions being taken or proposed? is it:
A. to stop spread of the virus or
B. to stop hospitalisations and deaths?
If it is to stop spread of the virus the evidence from the UK’s Health Security Agency shows that a vaccinated person aged 30 to 70 is twice as likely to become infected than an unvaccinated person. That means that vaccinated adults are twice as likely to spread infection and mandatory vaccination should make matters worse. The alternative of doing a lateral flow test, for example for travel or in large gatherings, would protect all whether vaccinated or not. (A vaccinated adult would have to be half as likely to transmit infection, given that they are twice as likely to become infected, to be equally ‘dangerous’ as an unvaccinated person.)
If it is to stop hospitalisation and death, if vaccination does significantly reduce hospitalisation and death, then the vaccinated need not worry. If vaccination isn’t effective enough to substantially achieve this then why vaccinate more people? If the concern is that the unvaccinated and infected will overwhelm the hospitals, then why not respect their rights and educate them in other known ways to reduce critical covid such as vitamin C and D and ivermectin?
Many unvaccinated people, like myself, are healthy, may have had covid already thus incurring natural immunity, have taken precautionary actions by boosting vitamin D level, knowing how to use high dose vitamin C upon infection, and are willing to take the risk. Is this selfish? No, because a) such a person’s likelihood of infecting another is likely to be less than a vaccinated person not taking these precautions; and b) these precautions have just as strong evidence of reducing hospitalisation and death as vaccines.
If you feel strongly about these infringements on civil liberty, not just in the UK, but across Europe, please support https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/ who are legally challenging vaccine passports and mandatory vaccination.