> Wouldn't a strict interpretation of your opinion imply speed governors?
Shouldn't we have them, if we generally agree that speed limits are good? If not, why have speed limits at all?
Would it not be better to physically limit your speed to 20mph in school zones, for instance? What "freedom" is being limited, in that case?
(Let's ignore stupid edge cases: sure you could need to get to the hospital - in that case you should call an ambulance. The availability and expense of that service is irrelevant to the question, here.)
Shouldn't we have them, if we generally agree that speed limits are good? If not, why have speed limits at all?
Would it not be better to physically limit your speed to 20mph in school zones, for instance? What "freedom" is being limited, in that case?
(Let's ignore stupid edge cases: sure you could need to get to the hospital - in that case you should call an ambulance. The availability and expense of that service is irrelevant to the question, here.)