[barrkel]

It's not actually. Think about it for a moment and you'll see life is full of tensions between preventing crimes and freedom / utility.

It's most obvious on the roads. Few non-commercial vehicles will limit your speed to the national maximum. Wouldn't a strict interpretation of your opinion imply speed governors?

[jmye]

> 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.)

[SiempreViernes]

Mindful that laws aren't perfect, I left space for exceptions in my statement.

In any case, I am not obsessed with cars so I find thinking of the particulars in your example simply too boring to contemplate, and the general objection that not all laws are perfect is likewise uninteresting.