Its probably not a pragmatic way reach decisions by making false assumptions. If you're up at 4AM, it does not mean you are sleep deprived of jacked up on crank. Making a point from false assumptions will hinder your ability to make good judgments.
I'm up at 4AM driving to the hospital quite frequently. Also, some people choose to sleep during the day and drive long distances to avoid traffic at night.
Another false assumption is that having no speed limit would pose a danger to others. Although it may be intuitive to think this way, statistical evidence of what goes on in real life says otherwise.
No speed limit does not equal danger. Just look at roadways that have no speed limit. A 2005 study by the German Federal Interior Ministry found that there was no increased risk between portions of the Autobahn that had no speed limit compared to portions that did (Austria&Sweden). In actuality, fatalities were less in Germany's limit-less portion compared to Austria's limit restricted portion.
Its good to hear everyone's varying opinion on the issue. Especially when it doesn't involve false assumptions or name calling (some other posts).
Although a law like this may never pass here in this country for 2 main reasons:
1) it would greatly reduce income from traffic stops to municipal courts [by ~33%]
2) majority will make false assumptions and reject it
it would still be nice to agree that the evidence supports the fact that speed does not kill, but instead, what is dangerous is irresponsible drivers preoccupied with distractions, alcohol and drugs, and unsafe vehicles.
