I think it has more to do with the fact that speed limits are unrealistically low than because people will always exceed the speed limit.

I think we have to agree to disagree on this. It's my opinion that people will always try to exceed whatever limits are set. It's human nature.

Of course, you could conceivably argue that the speed is more wrong than the distraction, but I wouldn't agree.

I wouldn't argue that, I agree that distractions are worse than speed. But I believe that it's speed combined with distraction that is the biggest problem. Being a little distracted at 25mph isn't much of a problem unless you're in a neighborhood with children playing. It's just that speed happens to be something we can regulate easily because there's an infrastructure in place to do that right now. Regulating distractions is more difficult at the moment.

You seem to be interested in going faster than other people. It kind of comes across as elitist, although I'm sure that's not what you mean. On the other hand, I'll readily admit to being elitist.

I'll readily admit it to being an elitist as well. At least, I'm an elitist in this sense: I believe that anyone who's willing to be extra-alert and to maintain a constant scan of his environment, so much so that he can see the cops before they see him, has earned the right to exceed the speed limit because he's a safer driver than most. This was the central premise of that book I read on the subject of avoiding speeding tickets, and I agree with it.

I don't think speed kills. I think bad driving does, and that's what needs to be outlawed, not speed.

Agreed. But again, bad driving combined with speed is the worst of all. And one of the two happens to be easier to monitor and regulate. If I understand correctly, you can also be ticketed for many bad driving habits (tailgating, weaving among traffic, etc.), so in a sense, bad driving is illegal. It's just a question of enforcement.