Making the choice to drive and then subsequently having to adhere to the rules of the behavior you're making the choice to engage in is a lot different than government shutting down businesses, telling business owners they can't have patrons or make sales, forcing places of employment to shut down leading to millions of people on unemployment, and dictating who is and who isn't allowed to go to work and make an income/provide for themselves. You know what will kill more than COVID-19? Starvation and loss of shelter. Forcing a society that has always functioned as prioritizing providing for yourself and not relying on authority bodies to do that for you into a system where you absolutely have no means to provide for yourself and must submit to government support (e.g. file for unemployment and survive off that for the foreseeable future) is entirely different than rules created around certain activities that you don't have to participate in if you don't like it.
Unfortunately, I think the reality of this whole thing has escaped a lot of initial intentions. The reality, as I've heard from multiple hospital workers (nurses, clinicians alike) is that there is a huge issue with artificial inflation and hospital financial stress that is making cases and deaths attributed to COVID-19 seem much more severe than it is in reality which feeds into these extended policies. For instance, I hear constant stories about how doctors are being pressured into signing off COVID-19 as cause of death in terminally ill or critically ill patients with other comorbitidies as those hospitals receive funding on the amount of patients dying from COVID-19 - when in any other case, a patient with stage IV cancer might catch the flu and perhaps die from exacerbated effects of the flu wouldn't have cause of death: flu on their certificate, it would be cause of death: X cancer; but in this case, always is written off as COVID-19. Or I've heard stories of admitting more patients than what is even necessary, non-critical COVID-19 patients, as hospitals receive funding and supplies based on the amount of cases they actively have etc.
This issue has become much more complicated than "protect the vulnerable" as it has transformed into something much more than that. There are so many politics and undercurrents at play that that baseline goal is not really the primary issue anymore. Furthermore, it is quite impossible to eradicate infectious disease with R=2 transmission rates off the face of the planet just by keeping everyone physically away from each other by arbitrary distances that are variable amongst the experts (is it 6ft or 10ft that COVID-19 can travel, no one knows). We've never in the history of time quarantined healthy people - anyone who really thinks all of this is simply to protect the vulnerable or that this is a sustainable solution for grander society and maintaining global economic systems should really try diversifying their research sources.