If the appropriate speed is zero, it's not always your fault and driving carries inherent risk. It isn't always you that's driving too fast for the conditions. It also doesn't mean that speeding is the cause of collisions. Going faster is sometimes statistically safer. The emphasis is on the conditions. Many roads could easily increase their speed limits. There is a long straight section (long for my area) where I could easily go 120 MPH without seriously increasing the probabilities of a collision. The view is exceptional and the sides of the highway are cut back quite a ways - meaning I'll have ample time to decelerate should something be at risk of entering the roadway. The posted speed limit is 45 MPH. If there is an animal, reduced visibility, or a risk of something entering my path of travel - my appropriate speed is much lower. The onus is actually on the traffic engineers to ensure the appropriate speed can be maintained. Let's say your going down a feeder route in a subdivision. It's posted at, say, 15 MPH. A dog darts out between the cars that line the roadway - and you can't stop in time, even though you're only going 15 MPH. That's bad road design and pragmatically still needs to be traversed with a vehicle. You driving too fast for the conditions may not always be your fault - because you're forced to drive too fast for the conditions. They put you in a position where the appropriate speed might have been zero and then told you to drive through it.