Was a Quarantine Necessary? Can you hold people against their will?

In August of 2009 Ziketan, with 10,000 people, was quarantined after three deaths from the pneumonic plague. Three people died and nine people were sickened during the course of the plague. The bacterium responsible for this plague is the same bacteria that caused the bubonic plague. This plague is basically the bubonic plague in the lungs. This quarantine, in my opinion, was not necessary because, as stated in the article, this disease can be treated with antibiotics. Quarantining the town was a bit extreme. They could’ve treated the people that had the disease and/or the people that show any symptoms of the plague. Towns should only be quarantined when there is an infectious disease that isn’t curable or any disease for which no treatment has been discovered.

People should not be held against their will, especially these people because they weren’t any threat to the health of other people. The people could of been treated with antibiotics instead of putting the entire town under quarantine. It would be different if the person had a disease that was deadly, then they should be quarantined even against their will.
This extreme action to the situation was not necessary. They did this out of fear because when you hear the word "plague" you automatically think of the Black Death which over a five year period from 1347 to 1352, 25 million people died due to it. One-third to one-half of the European population was wiped out! There may be some fear that arises from that but, no decision should be based off of fear. In this situation fear outweighs reason. A little like Lord of the Flies when the boy were so terrified they began doing their "dance" and out of fear, when they see Simon they attack thinking that he is the beast. This is a moment where fear has outweighed reason. The entire situation should've been handled a different and more reasonable way.