Freedom doesn't mean having the right to put other people's lives in danger.
You don't need to ask yourself that. We have seen this before. America lost its collective mind 20 years ago with the draconian and freedom-killing initiatives known as the war on terror and the Patriot Act, which are unprecedented, unjustified, and much worse than vaccine mandates (which have precedent).
The difference was that 9/11 "only" killed 2000 people. COVID19 is killing that many people every 3 days.
Again, you (and the rest of the sky is falling crowd) and I have a very different definition of what constitutes "danger" - that is, what level of risk/danger warrants certain social restrictions. And our COVID situation TODAY is simply not sufficiently dangerous to warrant the governmental/social overreach we're seeing. You and folks like you are of the mind that if we all aren't double vaxxed with a booster (or are we up to a second booster now? No, wait, that's in a few months), we are basically walking around blindly swinging a machete, endangering those around us. No. Get a grip. Never in the history of the world have we reacted to something with this level of threat with such a hysterical overreaction.
Your 9/11 analogy (which you've employed before) is not apt, as voluntary acts can't be compared to viruses or, say, natural disasters. They are very different in their features and relevant legal considerations. It's not simply about how many people something/someone kills which informs the societal response to said event/actor.
EDIT: And by the way, I do believe that our response to 9/11 was excessive - both in terms of the liberties lost at home as well as the war in the ME - but more importantly, it was not a properly targeted response. So even if you feel your analogy holds, it doesn't hold for me, as I felt we overreacted there too.