That 99% survival rate is missing the .5 or .9 at the end, so it's generous, and I can agree with the premise that those restrictions seem unreasonable to a lot of people. Some of the rules are certainly self-defeating (wearing a mask to walk your dog on an empty street, etc).

But I'm also curious when the unreasonable restrictions you stated would seem reasonable to you. If the survival rate was 98% so that twice as many people were dying every day, would you favor more severe rules? 95%? If the public was ignoring the guidelines and contributing to uncontrolled spread that meant hospitals were going to be overrun and 4000 people would be dying per day over the winter, would you favor shutting things down to prevent those deaths? The latter question is not far from where we stand at the moment and we may confront it within a month.