[DiggyJohnson]

How is

> limiting personal freedom, and potentially potentially taking away a right people are used to

not a rational concern? Sure you might personally be of a different opinion, but to claim these things can’t be the subject of a rational argument is absurd.

[bluecalm]

It's not absurd because even presenting facts like: driving fast is more dangerous, induce fear in many other drivers, cause more pollution including noise pollution, is wasteful (less efficient fuel/component wear wise) meets resistance.

The rational argument would be: "I know more people will die in accidents, more will get cancer, more will live with uncomfortable noise levels and more will travel stressed and in fear but I value this less than my freedom to go 200+km/h.

You about never hear that though because supporting high or no speed limits goes hand in hand with delusional thinking about dangers and harms of driving.