I for one agree with you
And the replies to the thread (some of them, maybe, by interpretation) are a sad reflection of the truth that you just spouted.

There's usually a limit for a reason, the problem is everyone thinks they are that special and highly skilled snowflake who it shouldn't apply to.

There are also the people who always drive at "30something", thinking that they are smarter than those who set the limit. 30 isn't plucked out of thin air: it's the point where if you hit an under-18 the stats show an 80% chance they will live (at 40, an 80% chance they will die). Hence it's reduced to 20 in areas where it's even more sensitive.

Always the Audi drivers too innit
(Cloudane, Mon 5 Jul 2010, 17:57, 2 replies)

Or those old people in rovers
That do 40mph when the limit is 60 holding everyone up and then continue to do 40mph where ever they happen to be, cul de sac, outside of a school at home time, busy town centre. What the hell is wrong with them.
(boarders You won't catch me with my trousers, Mon 5 Jul 2010, 18:59, closed)

That is very true
And I should clarify that although I advocate driving legally and safely there's no reason to crawl. Whilst the limit is not a target and sometimes it's sensible to do less (lanes) generally speaking somewhere within 0-5mph of it is a good place to be.
(Cloudane, Mon 5 Jul 2010, 19:23, closed)

those statistics
should really account for swerving.

It's as though you're saying, the child should only be exposed to a 20% risk of death, but it must be taught a lesson about road safety.
(LickOutTheJamsMotherfuckers!, Tue 6 Jul 2010, 15:00, closed)