Is this the begining

I have to wonder why you include Pike County in your SW Indiana calculations while ignoring Warrick County, especially since Pike County is not adjacent to the major population center in Vanderburgh but Warrick County is. Perhaps it's because Warrick County, which is a major bedroom community for Evansville (and has a population on its own that rivals the total populations of Gibson, Pike and Posey) has had 29 deaths. Yeah, that's just not as tidy.

I also find it interesting that there have been more deaths in those counties due to homicide and house fire. Really? You may be right, but if there have been 9+ homicides and 9+ house fire deaths during this time, I don't think I'll be visiting anytime soon. I mean the lack of COVID is nice, but I tend to try to avoid killers and arsonists, too.

You are correct that the death trajectory has been in decline in the areas you mention and in the state overall, especially in the more rural areas. But not everywhere. Certainly not across the country, but also not even everywhere in Indiana. Since May 18, which was two weeks after the state began to reopen, Elkhart County's death rate has tripled. Howard County's has close to quadrupled.

And it also just comes down to what is acceptable to people. From the time Indiana had its first COVID case to that May 18 date - in that 10-week period - Indiana had 1,787 deaths from the virus. In the nine weeks since then we have had 842 deaths. 842 is certainly a significant reduction from the first 10 weeks, but it's still 842 people. Is that acceptable to everyone?

As I drive down I-69 from central IN to Mount Vernon, my last counties driving through are Pike, Gibson, & Vanderburgh before arriving in Posey.  I could've included Knox County which also has zero deaths, but just stuck to my I-69 route.  Warrick is 3 counties from the Illinois line when I say southWEST Indiana but nonetheless yes Warrick has had 29 deaths with 25 of them coming from within nursing home facilities - again divisive since one faction who prefers inflated numbers wants to include them, while the other faction who prefers deflated stats would say since those came from institutionalized settings (albeit significant human beings) that those counts, when exclusively debating issues involving people being out and about and reopening society, have less relevance.  And to clarify another of your points, I did say "up until about 3 weeks ago" that covid was not in the top 10 causes of death - once the mortality count climbed from 5 to 6 in the four-county combined total, I believe homicides and house fires were then passed - now covid has risen to approx the 7th highest cause of death locally.

Lest we lose track of the data, as of last night [which is 130 days into the "15 days to slow the spread" phase], still over half (49) of Indiana's 92 counties had single-digit number of deaths and perhaps more importantly still 31 counties have 2 or less deaths with 10 counties remaining at -0-.  While I have less issue with masks being mandatory, or shutdowns occurring, in the counties where covid prevalence/potency is high and where population is dense, these statewide or federal mandates obviously hit many many areas which are virtually unaffected and highly unlikely that most will comply.  Studies prove (illustration A is adherence to speed limits) that when all of these "laws" are passed which aren't really enforced or enforceable that overall lawlessness increases as it becomes normal for the citizenry to break or ignore laws or choose which laws apply to them.  It almost seems as we're entering an "equitable punishment" stage in that subgroups who suffer now want everyone to suffer with them via laws and mandates so that no one gains an advantage (urban areas which should be locked down want the suburbs and rural areas closed too, people who don't feel safe getting out or shouldn't be out due to age or illness don't want anyone else to be able to get out either, etc)

Lastly, that same CDC website that shows covid info also displays alcohol information.  Even if I drink and enjoy it as much as the next guy, I can't help but see the parallel and think that if I'm pro-mask, pro-shutdown, pro-doing everything I can to save every single life, I also need to reluctantly favor a return to the Prohibition days.  88,000 alcohol-related U.S. deaths in 2019, 700K+ deaths in the last decade, amongst the top 3 so-called "preventable" causes of death every year.  And then OMG you've got the abortion dilemma...if I feel comfortable with the government mandating behaviors on most-likely completely healthy people just in case it might possibly lessen the likelihood that an unknown other person may in certain cases contract the virus and could die and have, in most cases, say 10% of their lifespan shortened,  how do I reconcile saying it's completely Unacceptable for the government to prevent the intentional 100% lifespan-shortening of a specific-known individual? especially at the rate of 700,000 of them a year or whatever the current number is.