Why not, I ask? Speed increases risk both for the speeder and those around him/her (let's face it, if I'm driving the limit or a little above and get rammed by someone doing 140, the speeder isn't the only one hurt) and also increases emissions. Enforcing speed limits to the degree needed to stop/significantly reduce speeding requires a fairly hefty investment in time and money by law enforcement. It would have to be phased in, since there are still cars on the road without ECMs and it may be impractical right now, but it's worth starting the conversation.

To me, the answer would be obvious regarding limiters, though not necessarily 'correct'.  Commercial vehicles virtually never have emergencies to deal with, but if you want to get your wife to a hospital for an in-progress birth, or anyone else who needed emerg treatment, a limiter could quite possibly be an avoidable cause of death.  Sure, a ticket might be fine, but not any version of a true limiter, IMHO. 

(By the way, the source should have read 'Gowlings'... guess I had my mind on Gordon Gowling alone or it was a mere typo(?)).

It says they don't care where the trucks originate from?  Could this limiter be shut off somehow when you leave Ontario?  Out here in Alberta the major highways are 110 km/hr, and 80% of people drive at least 120 km/hr.  Considering how much traffic is on there having all the commercial vehicles going under the speed limit will lead to people flying around them and be more dangerous than it is now.

I don't know if they still have it or not, but Montana was trying a highway limit of 140 km/hr a few years ago.  how do you think people will react to trucks passing each other at a max of 105 km/hr?

I have wondered why they make non-racing cars go upwards of 200 km/hr.  I could easily do 180 in my father-in-law's "mid-life crisis car", and not even feel it, when would that ever be needed?  Even the cops rarely go that fast.

Good point, but those emergency drives are generally in-city and it's unlikely you'd be breaking 115 on a city street (or there would be another, bigger, emergency). There's also the fact that the preferred course of action for these situations is to call an ambulance who would certainly not have the limiters (ditto cops and firetrucks) but reality is that there are times where that isn't practical. So, yes, that's one argument that would have to be raised. I'm not sure it's a dealbreaker, but it would have to be addressed before we could do this.

I sure hope it'd been a deal-breaker for the hundreds of thousands (? or more?) who live in rural settings and would indeed be driving on highways, plus those choosing to use, say for Toronto alone, the 401, 427, Don Valley and others, for the most expedient route. 

And 'preferred' don't mean squat if a life's at stake - there will be many, many valid (in my view anyway) exceptions to preference - city or not... always have been.

(no worries that this ain't religious - I mean, we've had in depth discussions on shaving legs! Its all good)

How about tour buses?  Those terrifying towering things wobble and careen through the highways, lurching from lane to lane, usually faster than anyone else.  I'd limit them to 105, and stick them in the same lanes as trucks too.  Those things are horrendous.

Naaaaah!  No limits there at all!  Rather, see Frank's current "Population Growth: " thread, encourage excessive way-faster-than-anyone 'God Speed' for those wobbly, careening tour buses and... help Frank out!  ;-)   [Shaving legs?  Kewl!  How about 'nearby' shaving?  Look up, look not too far up at all...]

For sure, the tour buses look like death-bringers worthy of a population-control method.  

I am of the opinion that speed limiters should be standard equipment on ALL vehicles and that you would need special dispensation to have it disabled/removed.

I am also of the opinion that this should be true across the country (unfortunately this opinion is soured by the knowledge that it is a provincial responsibility, not federal).

Finally I am of the opinion that speed limits should be lowered to 100 or preferably 90 on highways, and 40 in all residential areas within municipalities.  Furthermore speeding penalties should be increased (both in dollars and demerits).

Well BrettA,

I think it is another attempt by the ilk of Rodan and Goshira to make sure their food supply can't get away as quickly...:3

Now, a bit more seriously (but never solemnly), since cars are such DEADLY propositions, I would very much like to see that form of transportation become as safe as Airplanes. That would probably mean drivers having to give up some of their freedom, such as through empirically-tested driving schools, mandatory testing, and other vehicular limits.

Just a Self-writing poem,

Inannawhimsey

I have no problem with the devices to limit the speed, but I do think that they may be set a bit low.  In this province the speed limited on the TCH and other divided highways is 110.  But I think the devices should be set a bit higher than that.  Sometimes a driver needs a little surge of power to get around a slow moving vehicle, or merge into traffic.  Let's say 10 klms above the posted speed limit for the province.

Ontario has a very effective speed limiter - close 3 lanes of a 4 - lane 401 for construction.

The truth of this statement is so horribly painful... /facepalm

The trucking companies, and the trucker's unions supported speed limiters because the installation of limiters represents an entry cost to independant truckers and serves to reduce price competition from independants because it reduces the potential number of runs taken per day and distance that can be travelled.  After limiters become mandatory it takes more trucks to haul the same amount of goods.   This is good for the companies and good for unions and those who make their living driving for transport companies but bad for independants (who tend to cut rates) and are less able to absorb the extra costs imposed by speed limiters.  

On the other hand, none of those dynamics are at work in the general public insofar as a reduction of the speed limit is concerned.  Few would support such a reduction.  It cannot be justified on the grounds of safety and it cannot be justified on environmental grounds.  It won't be happening.  If you don't believe me get on the 401 out around Kitchener and  head for Toronto at about 6:30 in the morning.  Middle and outsdide lanes are doing 120 - 130 and most of the voters on the province are in those lanes.  In the inside lane the truckers are listening to baroque music on their stereos and lazing along at 105 under the weight of their speed limiters with their RPM's held down below the RPM range where maximum power and efficiency are reached and minimum pollutants emitted. 

For you busybodies who want everyone else to go slow together with you, I would suggest that you drive on any of the hundreds of 2-lane uncontrolled access highways available to take you to any destination to which a multilane contrlled access highway will take you.