system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
If we have a moral imperative to self quarantine, do we have an imperative not to drive cars?

It seems that if you're making the argument that we must self quarantine against the corona virus and that you are morally responsible if you infect someone with it (which I would agree with) then we must self quarantine and abstain from many practices that we commonly participate in, perhaps not driving being one of them. 

If we compare the amount of deaths caused by car accidents globally with the global death toll of corona viruses cases, about 83,000 people die every month from car accidents and about the same amount of people have died from corona virus in several months. These obviously aren't completely analogous, but it seems that if it's a serious imperative for one thing, then the other ought to be an imperative in its own right. I'm not proposing that everyone needs to stop driving their car because I understand how impractical that would be, but maybe if we thought about it in this way and attempted to walk or bike, perhaps take public transportation where we could, we might be better off, beyond the obvious environmental benefits. Do you think that's off? It seems right to me.

It seems to me even more clear that if this argument for self quarantining is being made then we must donate large amounts of money to charity and go vegan, amongst other things that I doubt many of the people making said argument would be willing to do.
gpt
Interestingly, consequentialist-based theories have a pretty intuitive response to this that isn't available to other systems of normative ethics. 

Since COVID-19 has the potential to spread exponentially, exposing others to it can catalyze a spread to hundreds of people. This could happen even if one lived fairly cautiously. The risk of materially injuring that many people with cautious behaviour by driving a car is just not quite there. The two are different in that respect, at least.