Law change from 60km/h to 50 km/h on local roads.
1) The change of making most suburban streets 50km/h zones from the previous 60km/h limit was necessary in order to save lives. By lowering speed levels, drivers have more time to react to obstacles they face. It was proven that by lowering the speed limit by 10km/h the average person would detect a moving person earlier and try and avoid collision faster. Being a lower speed it is easier to stop the car as it is less work on the brakes.
2) The government was trying to uphold the security and safety levels of every pedestrian. Most of these pedestrians are young children or older people that have little to protect themselves with, with slow reflexes and poor decisions.
3) A person doesn't have the right to choose the speed limit he can go at because he doesn't really know (even thought he might think he does) his capabilities in areas of reflex and maneuverability. It is a very logical change and it really doesn't lessen anyone's powers and freedom.
4) The law change is fair in that in only adds small ammounts of time to most car trips for people. A minute extra car trip is worth the life of a couple innocent pedestrians. It is relatively fair law and is appropriate to today's higher levels of road rage and skill deficiencies in drivers.
Smoking in public areas e.g. restaurants and sporting arenas.
1) The change to smoking in public areas has become ever more relevant with most people now know the consequences of the habit and want to stay away from it as much as possible. People have the right to enjoy their meals and public spectacles without having to worry about their health. Secondary smoke is much worse then what the smoker takes in.
2) The law is trying to uphold the common mans rights to enjoy his life without worrying about his health. A smoker can smoke in his own time and space. Smoking is now considered a hazard and the government is trying its best to get everyone to quit.