13 votes

Should it be ok to quarantine a person with a highly contagious / deadly virus or force them into treatment?

Should it be ok for people who are highly contagious with a deadly virus to be forcefully quarantined or forced into treatment?


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Let me get this straight

You believe it is OK to infect me with a potentially deadly disease simply because a way to cure it may exist? You do realize by doing that you are violating my rights in the most extreme sense.

Let us take that down a second rabbit hole. Do you believe it is OK for you to infect my child with a potentially deadly disease simply because a way to cure it may exist? You are a sad individual.

If I were the victim of the disease would I want to be in quarantine? Of course not. Would I segregate myself to avoid killing other people? You are damned skippy. Unlike you, I am a freedom lover and I know that my freedom to do something ends the exact instant that it treads on your freedom. Or, if you like, you can offer a reason that a person's freedom to roam is more important than a person's freedom to stay disease free.

Oh, and don't get into the hypothetical "he may not know he is infected argument" as that is off topic here and subject to a whole other debate. We're debating that we know the person is infected with a deadly disease.

To Add to that...

The FDA needs to be abolished to allow new medical discoveries in areas of health. The FDA has made cure's for many diseases Illegal. So do your research and then please don't resort to force on everyone who you think has leprosy. It's wrong!

I don't believe in quarantine

Now if you want to quarantine yourself in your own house fine but if someone needs to get outside who has a disease, let them. A quarantine camp is no different than a concentration camp. And if you do put them in a camp you are giving them the death sentence!

Quarantine Lunacy! - Apollo 11 Quarantine, 1969

Apollo 11 Astronauts quarantined, 1969. 30 second newsreel. President called in as a witness to identify 3 men claiming to have gone to the Moon on taxpayer money. No charges were pressed.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

As long as proper procedures and standards have been set


No different than someone with hiv/aids knowingly infecting others.

Should be a standard set for deadly/incurable types, not the common cold or swine flu/west nile which are media fear mongering and kill a statistically insignificant amount of the population.

This should only be used for individual/small scale cases.

In case of wide spread pandemic on the scale of the bubonic plague, influenza, this would not apply.

No state has the resources available to properly care for everyone in the case of a massive pandemic. They act like they do, that every pandemic will be totally controlled and have a happy Hollywood ending. Don't be fooled.

History doesn't lie, but governments are great at it.

Non aggression principle

I'd say it depends. Are they knowingly spreading a highly contagious and deadly virus? If so they are committing an act of aggression against you. In a free society the remediation would be to sue for damages in a private court system. Or in the worst case scenario you have a right to defend yourself using deadly force.

Again it depends, are they trying to minimize exposure using a mask and staying inside as much as possible. Maybe only bumping into you at a grocery store? Then I'd say no. People can only be accountable for their actions, not the environment, plagues, acts of God, viruses, or cthulhu.

In this particular case there were some interesting variables.
1. He was likely an illegal alien
2. He was acting in a manner that would put more people at risk

I say the police had grounds to arrest based on putting other people in harms way. Not for, as the headline said, 'skipping out on treatment'.


From what I understand, the virus can be shed through the skin, via sweat and oil glands. If that is the case, standing next to a person with the disease, unprotected, could be a danger. The isolation for this disease would have to be complete. Any person treating the patient would have to have the skin surfaces covered completely. It is not spread like a cold. Its dangers are known. The isolation of the disease would require a very strict quarantine with isolation of the person while they were capable of spreading the disease. It sounds like the virus can be killed on other surfaces with common disinfectants. The danger would be direct, person to person contact.

If it's deadly and they aren't quarantining

themselves , then you have a right to kill them if they are attempting to make contact with you.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy


Killing someone with a lethal weapon would result in massive release of the virus! That would put one in, even more, danger.

I would say...

I would say that everyone has a right to self defense against a person using a deadly weapon in an aggressive manner . A deadly biological weapon (a contaminated person) used in that manner would clearly fit that description and justify use of deadly force.



Since the subject has a highly communicable disease that is fatal to others if untreated, by knowingly refusing either quarantine or treatment he is willfully endangering others.

fatal to how many?

Contracting the disease is deadly. There is no treatment, only supportive care. 69-90% mortality rate, in treated patients, is as good as shooting someone with a handgun!

Either way it's FORCE!

I have had a few run-ins with illnesses that had me wondering if my time was limited. Just two months ago I went from 98.6 degree temperature to 104.4 degree temperature in 30 minutes. I laid in bed for 30 minutes shaking uncontrollably and thought I was having a seizure. I was scared. Come to find out the symptoms I had (and a doctor who treated my wife's father suspected) were similar to the Noro-virus. I don't know if I had it for sure or not, but I could have had it as I was sick for almost one week.

HOWEVER, treatment was administered in the form of 5 hours of cold clothes draped over my body with a fan blowing on me. My temperature fell to 102 after five hours and finally the fever broke about 6 hours after onset.

FURTHERMORE, I would much rather have had my wife administering treatment than being forced into the sterility and atmosphere of quarantine. Force of any kind...not good...AND what I mean by not good is the government would have a hell of a time having a mass, willful quarantine if people feel strongly about being forced to accept what the government says they may or may not get.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

Great Question

I'd like to see what the die hard libertarians on this site think about this question.

My initial response is "Yes".

Voluntary segregation...

or forced quarantine IS the alternative. If willfully endangering others of a communicable disease that typically ends in death...then that is when government has a purpose in protecting your victims from your willful endangerment. I know... Slippery slope as to which, where and when though...

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

Look at it like a weapon

If a person goes to shoot your loved ones are you going to sit by and watch? Same with a deadly disease. They either segregate themselves quietly or they get treated like they are a deadly threat. Your rights to do anything end the moment they tread on the rights of others.