"People must be allowed to make their own decisions and nobody gets to say they are not thinking properly.
Outside of the very specific (and legally restricted) circumstance of sectioning someone, we don't restrict people based on the quality of their thinking."
Well yes I would agree in an ideal world, but we don't allow some decisions and we do restrict some people on the quality of their actions/thinking - like you said sectioning, and also imprisonment. I think no one would disagree that some people definitely need restricting in some circumstances (eg a rape and stabbing at local rave)
I suppose the key is "legally restricted" and whether people see these legal restrictions as reasonable or not? Some are straightforward eg everyone except rapists themselves would think rapists should be legally restricted.
But in other situations it isn't so clear cut. I can think of lots of examples of "crimes" I personally, and lots of other people think should be legalised/decriminalised, but I accept some people agree and some don't. So do we go with the majority view - and if so what about unusual cases such as the lockdown?
Apologies if I'm repeating a previous discussion I've missed, or if you just want to say "fuck off and shut up we want to talk about going out not discussing laws for fucks sake" 
I won't be offended.
It's just that the last couple of threads I have caught have been really interesting to me, especially as someone who resents phrases like "it's for your own good" and "you've let the class down" 
but yet now I feel I have to do something "for my own good" and it's really pissing me off!