A speed limit enforcer sits by the side of the road. A "speeder" passes by. The speed limit enforcer "speeds" in order to catch up with the "speeder," who then "speeds" away, very quickly. The speed limit enforcer than "speeds" – at very high speed – for  more than five minutes, chasing nothing because the "speeder" is long gone. During those five minutes, the speed limit enforcer drives at speeds well in excess of 100 MPH – which was faster than the "speeder" was driving when he drove past the speed limit enforcer. The enforcer keeps on "speeding" – at very high speeds – long after it's obvious the "speeder" has "gotten away with" his "speeding.

So has the "speed limit enforcer."

Few people seem interested in asking the obvious questions.

The first is why is it that these speed limit enforcers are empowered to drive at speeds that would land anyone else in jail? Does "speed" not "kill" when it is a speed limit enforcer who "speeds"? Some will say it is necessary – and so justified – to empower speed limit enforcers to "speed" because how else are they going to catch up to "speeders"? This brings up the question of speed limits themselves. Why should it be a matter for law enforcement? Speed advisories can serve a valuable informational purpose. There's a curve up ahead and you might want to slow down, assuming you are unfamiliar with the road.

Speed limits are arbitrary Thou Shalt Nots. There is nothing inherently wrong (morally) with driving faster than a sign says you're allowed to. If that were not true, then "speeding" would not be something almost everyone consciously does almost every day. We do it because we know there's no harm in it. It is why we do not feel moral guilt or shame when we get handed a "ticket" because a speed limit enforcer caught us driving 47 in a zone with a posted 35 MPH limit that almost no one obeys – unless there is a speed limit enforcer around.

During the era pf Prohibition, when it was illegal to buy or sell or drink alcohol, people weren't ashamed about ignoring the law that said Thou Shalt Not Drink – because they knew that having a drink was not immoral because having a drink didn't cause any harm to others. It's the same with "speeding." As was true during Prohibition, only a small handful of Puritan hysteric types disagree. As was true back then, even the enforcers agree – though they pretend to disagree.