Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are committed by the state (MN at least) for mental health reasons, and in certain cases, forced to take neuroleptic drugs, some of which are injected. Tyranny? In my opinion, promoting an anti-vaccination stance is akin to shouting fire in a crowded theater, or should be viewed as such. It's a public health risk.
If you were committed by the state for mental health reasons, and in certain cases, forced to take neuroleptic drugs, some of which are injected, would you consider that tyranny? I definitely would ... But I concede that's a pretty hard problem to deal with. I don't have any answers. I personally know someone who is wrongfully convicted and serving a prison sentence. Maybe my mind is corrupted by movies but I've seen…
My point was that people who refuse vaccines and people with mental illness who refuse to comply with treatment potentially both pose a danger to others.
If someone is harmed, whether by preventable disease or violence as a result of another's refusal to accept the recommendations of medical professionals, the party that refused vaccination/treatment causes harm to another without being held liable. Either someone else pays to make the party who suffered whole, or the party who suffered loses.
I feel the state should intervene when people are unable to make the correct decision about medical treatment when there are negative externalities. It's unfair to those who comply.