No one is saying freeways shouldn't exist, but they also shouldn't be used to drive at speeds where humans simply can't react in time such as debris in the roadway or a stalled car on the shoulder.
Also just because someone is driving on the freeway doesn't mean they wanted to. In our region there isn't much of a choice between driving and other modes of transportation. If people think driving 55 mph on I-94 is boring then that's their problem. It shouldn't be used as justification for raising speed limits.
Just because someone exists in society doesn't mean they want to pay taxes but they still have to because of the social contract they enter by living here. And no one is saying they should drive at unsafe speeds. If the experts determine it is safe to raise speeds in an area we should listen to them.
Right now the majority of people are already driving over the speed limit. They are voting with their gas pedal. They don't feel unsafe at those speeds or if they did they choose to enter the social contract of existing on a freeway. If people feel unsafe driving at 60 mph or other speeds that the engineers feel is safe there are plenty of other roads they can go slower on. You yourself said earlier:
The problem is our impatient culture where we need to get somewhere as quickly as possible even if it means compromising the safety of ourselves and those around us.
If getting somewhere quickly isnt as important too you and others then take frontage roads. There is no one stopping you from doing that.
"Experts" have been wrong before. Are these the same "experts" who think if we add one more lane to a road or highway then that will fix the congestion problem?
Again, just because people "feel" that driving 60+ is safe doesn't mean it actually is. Everyone has the right to safety. People don't have the right to drive what they "feel" is safe. An officer won't be convinced by the argument that you felt safe driving in a certain way.
An officer probably wouldn't pull someone over in the first place for driving 59 in a 55 so they actually would agree with me. I appeal to experts until research shows different which is how we know induced demand is a thing.
Everyone has a right to safety to a certain extent but there is a line that will be drawn. Nothing is completely safe and there is inherant risk in living life. Just like there is inherant risk to the freeway. Like I said if people don't feel safe on the freeway they don't have to go on it. The difference between me and you is I recognize the rights of people to choose as long as it doesn't unduly impose on other people's freedom. Who determines what the acceptable range of risk is? The people who run these studies that the government commissions.
What your doing is enforcing your values that already nobody follows on the rest of society (that's why I used the example of the majority of people speeding) preventing people making a choice that would make their life better.
Those values you hold have consequences. What if something came up before work and going that little bit faster would allow them to not get fired for being late. Or if someone's going to the hospital and needs to get there in time and needs to go a little bit faster. Or if someone was kept late from work and that little bit faster is the difference between them having to pay an extra fee for childcare that they might not be able to afford. If any of them get pulled over they will have a ticket that they have to pay that they might not be able to afford. If they can't pay their license could be suspended and then they will have to make the choice between driving and risking their license being resuspended and higher fines and not having access to many jobs.
These are all decisions people make everyday. I'm not talking about speeding recklessly in any of these circumstances. We need better driver training. We need better public transit so people have better choices instead of driving. We might even need lower winter speed limits. We shouldn't make the majority of people have to risk prosecution for doing what the road was designed for. If our infrastructure allows a certain speed we should get the most out of our investment. Would we build high speed rail and run trains at 40 mph on it? Either stop building freeways at a design speed of 70 or stop signing those freeways at 55. I'm open to either one. If the people running these studies say it should stay at 55 I would defer to their knowledge to keep the road safe. If the majority of people were driving the speed limit already then I wouldn't be opposed to it because that would be what the people want. But everyone already knows that the freeway is risky and the vast majority still drive over the speed limit knowing the risk.