Using the unqualified word "freedom" has an ambiguity that political actors exploit. Freedom to do something is entirely separate to "free to live in a world where ___".

To be honest, I feel the latter sense of the word is a bit of a stretch - semantically, not politically.

But you see it because "freedom" is a powerful word in politics, and rather than argue against "freedom", pundits go up the ladder of abstraction and argue the definition instead.

Sorry, that question was rhetorical to point out the sillyness of equating driving to freedom.

Ah. Well I hope my answer was useful for anyone who didn't take it as rhetorical!