Except Doug, the obvious shortcoming of our system that due to the lack of CIR or other extended democratic powers, we cannot actually implement such a change without:
1- having enough local representatives across the electorates of the country who want it remedied- regardless of if people outside these electorates would have voted for them
2- compromising other policy (for example, if we only had three candidates who supported it, but one wanted to reinstall the death penalty, and the other advocated communism, the electorate is expected to choose between unsatisfactory road regulations, the death penalty and communism, as opposed to being able to individually remedy this rule independently and thus rendering your shallow rhetorical argument moot.

You know, it's almost sad that it takes you almost two weeks to come up with another attempt at an argument, and they take seconds for the rest of us to pick apart, even with information we already posted because you always avoid having to address them.

And King Hazaa your idea is simply to have more collateral damage on the roads until what you consifdered to be the correct balance is found?

And the other answer to CIR is for the electorate to lobby hard for these, and they could be achieved. That is part of democracy also. It seems that the vast majority of people are quite content with the present system, otherwise they would be joining political party branches in droves.

Perhaps it is really that rather than 'the vast majority' of people may agree with the speed limits - and many who get caught are because of inattention rather than your deliberate policy of flouting the speed limits because you are so much a better driver than the rest of us?

What is next? Abolish parking fines and let people park where and when they like? After all, surely there should be no reason for people not to park blocking the view of pedestrian crossings at schools, or on 'blind corners'.

Why not just let those people with high powered cars set the speed limits?

Actually, I am in favour of speed limiters on cars. And before you start arguing that they would not give you enough reserve speed, is it really necessary to have to do 150k/h to overtake someone who is driving at 108k/h in a 110k/h zone? Or is that more to do with ego?

By the way, does your nickname really indicate that you want to be able to rule? King? King!! hahaha

Lets us get rid of Kings and other non democratically elected symbols of (horse) power!

For CIR simple- if people were in fact in a position to say what they wanted with policy, and instead advocated a change, then you do not actually have satisfaction in the policy at all, do you?

And you attempt to pretend that because nobody is going to start a riot over our speed limits or lack of CIR rights = satisfaction with how things are going at the moment can be casually tossed into the "Doug's poorly constructed attempt to obsfucate or divert the issue" bin.

You know Doug, considering we have given you plenty of time to cough up a single fact of counter-evidence to the mountains of evidence to our own cases, but instead make posts that exist in a vacuum of information progress, filled with nothing but repeated attempts to be dramatic and stupid analogies, I might just wait until you can actually substantiate your position than returning once in a while just to bore us with another "If you speed you cause great death and suffering because you're bad and you don't like rules"

By all means continue- you're helping our case, after all.

And don't bother trying to pretend we aren't answering- we actually have already answered your presumably rhetorical questions long before you even joined this thread- let alone continued to reply with the same line over and over.