All government action and regulations are back by the threat of violence. This is an irrefutable fact, since the is the way government enforces their actions. Sure the first stage maybe masked in the guise of non-violence in the form of fine or other punishments but underlying all of that is the fact that if you resist a person with a gun will show up to force your compliance

Your are correct that I do not find the small risk vaccinated person's have from an unvaccinated person to be at a level to justify mandates as reasonable

>not allowing people who aren’t vaccinated to participate in all facets of society can be construed as a type of force.

"Not allowing" - how are you going to "not allow" without using force of some sort?

Yes, there’s force backing those prohibitions (I literally mention that in the sentence you quoted), but what I wrote was that no one is talking about forcefully injecting anyone. You can decline the vaccine, parts of the rest of society just won’t allow you to interact with them. But if you’re the type to value your negative liberty that much, I’m sure you can manage without?