This is why masks and gathering limits are prudent.

There's a difference between reckless endangerment/homicide than an accident. Ridiculous false equivalency.

And yet, comparison of catching a virus to homicide by gun is not.

That was not intended as a comparison, but as an obvious example of where "my body, my choice" clearly does not apply to making a slight movement of your index finger.

OP pointed out that this is contradictory to the usual rhetoric on abortion.

Your response was that we make just such an exception for guns and drunk driving. The implication, therefore, is that this is of such an equivalent moral imperative, that the same reactions are justified here.

You may not want to be drawing the analogy, but if you aren't, there's no point in raising the subject at all.

I'm pointing out that it's not, just like drunk driving and moving your finger when it happens to be connected to a gun aren't "pro-choice" moments.

"My body, my choice" doesn't apply in the same fashion when other people's rights are also involved. (And, to head-off the "nuh-uh", pro-choicers tend to fall down on the "no" side of fetal personhood.)

It's nothing like either of those, let alone "just like" them.

Catching a virus is not, in any way, like pulling the trigger on gun or choosing to drink and drive. The former happens to you. The latter two require personal agency.

"Sure, just like drunk driving or twitching your trigger finger when someone just happens to be in front of the gun."

And I quoted you -- you make a comparison to homicide. Comparing catching a virus to homicide of any sort is...extreme.

If you're going to argue that gun homicide and drunk driving are examples that should also be followed here, you are making the analogy between catching a virus and those examples.