http://www.speedlimiteraustralia.com.au

Here they are seen as a safety device among other attributes.

Aidan and others;

Anything that interferes with the driving or control of a motor vehicle is bad.
Firstly we MUST NOT put our lives in the hands of a machine, especially one that has AI ability.
Computers and electronics in general, are death traps.
With all the cars I have today, my wife and I will avoid buying a new car with today's technology.
The ones we have with only minor electronics or computer aids, are enough of a nuisance, with regards to reliability.
Whether speed limited or any device that takes over control of a land based vehicle is asking for trouble.
The amount of deaths that have already been caused by AI cars, is already at a level of concern, especially when it is supposed to be a system for saving lives.
I would rather make shocking comments now than have people in shock later when they lose a friend or family member, and it will happen.
Statistically we all know I am right, so don't get all high and mighty about me saying it.
Firstly, the level of competence by current drivers, especially the young maggots.
They are arrogant, self absorbed and extremely dangerous, and that's before they get IN the car.
Once they start the engine, well, watch out.
On the road, they are the ones right up your arse pushing you to go faster, I must remind these pieces of ....... that the wording is speed LIMIT, so I always travel at around 2kmh under the LIMIT.
Then as soon as there is enough room to squeeze out they fly out to pass, but then there's another guy in the other lane, also abiding by the law.
Then she sees a gap back in front of me which leaves approx 30cm of clearance between us as she darts back in front of me.
Leaving me vulnerable to ramming into her rear, which sounds much more appealing than it actually would be, because at that moment she has caused ME to be in breach of the "following too close" law, and therefore a possible fine.

Issy, that device is a death trap.
Keep well away from them.
The better alternative which cars like Ford and others adopted some years ago was the audio unit on the dashboard, which you could set at whatever speed you chose, and it's function was to give off a sound which alerted you to the fact you have just exceeded your selected speed limit.
Much better and universally accepted idea.
It meant that it left you in control of the car and simply 'advised' you rather than take control away from you.

Altrav,

You said,

"I can answer that because it came up as a think tank question decades ago and it appeared again every now and then.
The reason we cannot have governors on our engines is because we must not remove the flexibility and control of the vehicle from the driver"

Well that statement is wrong, there have been, as I said, governors on vehicles since the dawn of the motor age.

Issy, I did not disagree with you because I am aware of what you say, but as we can see the idea was relegated to industrial vehicles such as forklifts, for obvious reasons.
The idea was dropped very early in the motor cars development, as we see from historical records.
It was originally created because no-one was familiar with the early motor cars and were incorporated to limit the engine revs to not over-rev the engine and was even tried as a means to comply with the early laws requiring a man with a red flag to walk in front of a car.
From memory, I think these poor guys were in mortal danger if the driver did not/could not stop in time, as some of the early cars had abysmal brakes, and that is if they were adjusted correctly, as the early cars had a very demanding service regime.

Altrav,
Your distrust of computers is so illogical that I feel I'd better check: are you aware of the differences between PCs and safety critical computer systems?

Features like ESP make vehicles much safer, so I'm puzzled as to why you'd want to avoid using them - although AIUI there is normally a way to turn them off if you want.

Deaths in self driving cars was a very major concern even when the number that had occurred was zero. I don't think saving lives was the original point of them, but it was recognised that they wouldn't be widely accepted until they were a lot safer than conventional cars. And with all the R&D that's currently underway, it's only a matter of time before they are.