[kryogen1c]

> What "state-sponsored violence" are you referring to?

Not referring to a status quo, but to the implication of the parent, and yours after the fact, that we should consider mandating vaccines.

> deadly communicable disease

If you think this is the only thing on the US vaccination schedule, you should do a little research.

[SpicyLemonZest]

The Trump regime murdered a guy for protesting them today, so I'm not interested in engaging with sophistry about mandates that might hypothetically lead to violence at some unspecified point in the future. Rules are rules and violence is violence, they're not the same thing and I won't waste my time talking to people who can't see that.

[kryogen1c]

> The Trump regime murdered a guy for protesting them today

I dont know what youre talking about, I dont follow politics. And even if I did, I dont know what relevance that could have on our conversation.

> I'm not interested in engaging [...] I won't waste my time talking

Then I agree, commenting on a public forum is not the right place for you

> Rules are rules and violence is violence

Laws (not sure why you switched to taking about rules) are explicity - not implicitly - backed by state violence. Unsure where the confusion is.