It's really narrow minded to find all drivers reckless when you clearly cite pathological behaviour that's adopted by a minority of drivers. It shows you do not evaluate this rationally and makes your argument less credible.
For example, there was recently a statistic floated around that half the people in the UK had been in an accident. Assuming that all these accidents were one-on-one collisions (unlikely, people also "lose control" all by themselves), this suggests that at least 25% of drivers drive recklessly, as they have caused an accident at some point in the past. I do not understand how 25% are "pathological".
Add to this the number of people who also drive recklessly but for sheer luck have not caused an accident yet and those people who have caused accidents without involving other drivers and the above 25% go up even further.
So yes, I stand by my previous comment.