I’ve never met a person taking high risk actions who thinks they are unqualified to do so. But they always think some other people are.
If you are doing 45 on a California freeway, YOU are the danger. Not the car going 75. You.
[Edit: Interesting that there are multiple effects, e.g. the sibling comment, that refer to similar but distinct phenomena!]
When skilled people either underestimate how hard it is to do something, or gauge a complex task that they have expertise in as easier than it actually is.
Preemptively restricting the space of possible (or likely) situations is the cornerstone of designing safe systems.
Giving system owners RBAC controls so they can choose who is an admin, versus not giving system owners admin privileges at all.
But more importantly, the point of my comment is that the axiom that everyone thinks themselves competent enough, is true at every level of risk. No matter how low risk something is, someone can and will still overestimate their capabilities and muck it up. If we're using that as justification to impose restrictions, there would be no actions that someone could not justify restricting.
More important than that is actually learning to predict hazards. Over years of experience, what was unexpected becomes hedging risks. Tight corners in residential areas, parked cars blocking visibility, managing distance not just from the car in front of you but behind you. That obviously requires slowing down in those sections.
One of the few places unrestricted speed makes sense, is a fully enclosed highway with very little traffic and enough lanes, during the daytime.
that makes such a person unpredictable, and a road danger.