Should WISCONSIN go to MANDATORY AUTO INSURANCE LAW? [Archive]

Want_Notch

01-04-2008, 07:19 AM

voted no, some of my vehicles are registered and never see the road....y the hell should I have to insure them for that??

I do daily drive my pos that is uninsured as well...... accident aren't 'accidents' there is always reason behind them....... don't drive like a sausage and you will never find yourself in one

This is the reason insurance rates are so high in this state.

So lets say you hit some black ice spin out and crash into another car.....what then?

Bottom line is if you can't afford to insure it don't funcking drive........

indyzmike

01-04-2008, 07:51 AM

Driving always has the risk of causing an accident. You should have to CYA, not every one else.

indyzmike

01-04-2008, 07:59 AM

voted no, some of my vehicles are registered and never see the road

If you don't drive them, no problem.

don't drive like a sausage and you will never find yourself in one

I wish it was that simple. Not reality.

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 08:06 AM

This is the reason insurance rates are so high in this state.

So lets say you hit some black ice spin out and crash into another car.....what then?

Bottom line is if you can't afford to insure it don't funcking drive........

again driving faster than conditions allow...you made my point for me...... drive like a sausage face the consequences...... if someone uninsured where to run in that case I see why insurance rates would be increased. If I am ever in an accident I will pay for the damage, simple as that. but people tend to avoid a slow moving pile of rust ne way :rolf

it is the lack of common sense that makes insurance necessary in the first place. Never crashed a car in my life, don't intend to. I can absolutely afford to insure everything I own....but I don't because it is money wasted.

what it comes down to for me is I don't believe ne government should be out to protect people from themselves, it is ridiculous that they should tell me how best I should spend my own money. Their responsibility is to aid the prosecution of people who would shurck their responsibility, ie someone who was driving and couldn't afford it.

The risk/benefit analysis for my DD pos $500 wonder ..... no insurance :thumbsup

Slow Joe

01-04-2008, 08:10 AM

I think we should have manditory insurance...

Karps TA

01-04-2008, 08:17 AM

We have laws against doing drugs, robbing people and murder, yet everyday people are doing it? So why would creating another law make any difference. The people driving without insurance are most likely not going to obey the law anyways. They'll get a way around it. I mean a guy who's here illegally anyways, probably isn't too worried about not having insurance.

Want_Notch

01-04-2008, 08:20 AM

again driving faster than conditions allow...you made my point for me...... drive like a sausage face the consequences...... if someone uninsured where to run in that case I see why insurance rates would be increased. If I am ever in an accident I will pay for the damage, simple as that. but people tend to avoid a slow moving pile of rust ne way :rolf

it is the lack of common sense that makes insurance necessary in the first place. Never crashed a car in my life, don't intend to. I can absolutely afford to insure everything I own....but I don't because it is money wasted.

what it comes down to for me is I don't believe ne government should be out to protect people from themselves, it is ridiculous that they should tell me how best I should spend my own money. Their responsibility is to aid the prosecution of people who would shurck their responsibility, ie someone who was driving and couldn't afford it.

The risk/benefit analysis for my DD pos $500 wonder ..... no insurance :thumbsup

Where did I say driving faster thatn conditions allow?
You can wipe out being very careful.

OK so when you get in an accident with your "$500 uninsured POS DD" and hurt someone and are not only on the hook for their car but their medical bills as well I will laugh my ass off at you because the first thing you're going to want to do is file bankruptcy.................

"Their responsibility is to aid the prosecution of people who would shurck their responsibility"

You just proved my point with the above statment. If you drive a vehicle it is your responsibility to insure it.........

tommyt5078

01-04-2008, 08:40 AM

I know this if someone causes an accident and dosn't have ins. they get a ticket that about $1300 for not having ins. happened last year and the lady that caused the accident got one!!!!! This is a Wisconsin state law.

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 08:48 AM

Where did I say driving faster thatn conditions allow?
You can wipe out being very careful.

OK so when you get in an accident with your "$500 uninsured POS DD" and hurt someone and are not only on the hook for their car but their medical bills as well I will laugh my ass off at you because the first thing you're going to want to do is file bankruptcy.................

"Their responsibility is to aid the prosecution of people who would shurck their responsibility"

You just proved my point with the above statment. If you drive a vehicle it is your responsibility to insure it.........

i'd sell everything I own before declaring bankruptcy...... i don't intend to shurck my responsibilities EVER..... u owe someone money you work your ass to pay it off simple as that. That is the common sense and work ethic alot of people are lacking today.

As a sophomore in HS I use to move upper classmens cars as a joke by picking them up and spinning them sideways. I put a big dent in a toyota pickup lifting it one time.....and guess what? I paid the $2000 to ge the sucker fixed, my fault my responsibility is to pay. I could of left it and left it up to a mystery....but I fessed up and paid for what I did. I'm an honest person and that is what u do.

I just choose not to insure my lil pickup. When I lived in Cal I had ALL my vehicles insured cus it was state law. Out here u don't have to, so I have chosen not to insure some vehicles. I will take full responsibility for my actions, they are mine and no one elses. I don't drive with anyone in the uninsured vehicles EVER so I never put a passenger at risk.

laws are well and good, but the prosecution and enforcement are sorely lacking. Me personally tax money would be better invested in more police and courts than in helping some charity cause or pet project. Honestly how much money goes to the schools out here is bar none INSANE. I have never seen a more bleeding heart everyone should have the opportunity to do what they want approach. Stop wasting my tax money. end off subject rant :rolf

juicedimpss

01-04-2008, 08:49 AM

do i carry insurance? yes,full coverage on everything i drive.
as much as it would be nice to know that you would be better protected from everyone else on the road,thats just one more step toward the liberals controlling your life and FORCING you to do what they think is best.
screw that.I can make up my own mind.

Want_Notch

01-04-2008, 08:51 AM

laws are well and good, but the prosecution and enforcement are sorely lacking. Me personally tax money would be better invested in more police and courts than in helping some charity cause or pet project. Honestly how much money goes to the schools out here is bar none INSANE. I have never seen a more bleeding heart everyone should have the opportunity to do what they want approach. Stop wasting my tax money. end off subject rant :rolf

Well at least we agree on this.

Crawlin

01-04-2008, 08:52 AM

Yes for a variety of reasons.

If a vehicle is in storage, and you don't drive it, by all means, don't have insurance on it. But if it's ON THE ROAD you SHOULD have insurance.

I don't care how cautious of a driver you are, hit a patch of ice, spin out INTO ME, why should MY insurance company pay for my damages when YOU are the one who caused the accident. Now of course I have a ton of underinsured/uninsured coverage, but I don't feel I should make a claim on something that wasn't caused by me.

PLUS, since about 85% of the people are financing vehicles, it's a REQUIREMENT to have insurance. I can't tell you how many people get a car they can't afford cause they HAVE to have something "status" and then have the insurance and then cancel it cause they can't afford it. The banks don't know this until they up and decide to check to see if insurance is still good. If they don't do this, then they'll never know.... UNTIL... that person totals there car and now still owes $15,000 to the bank that insurance would have paid off. Now they don't pay it, it's a P&L writeoff on your credit, and welcome to 20+% interest rates and barely able to rebuild that credit in the next 6-7 years cause it knocked your score down 150pts.

There's just TOO many downsides to NOT having it when it's SUPER CHEAP. I mean seriously, my insurance on an '08 Impala SS through state farm is like $800/year. $66/month is unaffordable to people? I'm only 27 so I'm still "young". That's full coverage, $100deducts, and MORE than enough liability. Maybe the people with shitty driving records can't afford it, but then again, maybe they deserve that higher payment and should stick with the speedlimit or a designated driver.

WickedSix, I can assume you don't have health insurance either than right? I mean you don't PLAN on getting sick/injured and you are cautious when you walk. I can see your point on insuring a $500 beater, but personally, I'd be that much more worried about a "beater" with a part failure and then getting into an accident. I don't know this, but do you still live at your parents? Because if you do, by not having insurance, even if you are over 18y/o, that person you MIGHT hit, can then sue your parents for their medical bills/car repairs/etc...

I agree with WantNotch on everything he said. You may not have this happen, on the other hand you might.... But someone without insurance is gonna tear into a person and that person will now be ****ed all because the OTHER guy didn't have insurance.

CobraSnake

01-04-2008, 08:55 AM

it wouldn't bother me any because I've always had insurance and always will have it.

Mark

Crawlin

01-04-2008, 08:57 AM

i'd sell everything I own before declaring bankruptcy...... i don't intend to shurck my responsibilities EVER..... u owe someone money you work your ass to pay it off simple as that. That is the common sense and work ethic alot of people are lacking today.

As a sophomore in HS I use to move upper classmens cars as a joke by picking them up and spinning them sideways. I put a big dent in a toyota pickup lifting it one time.....and guess what? I paid the $2000 to ge the sucker fixed, my fault my responsibility is to pay. I could of left it and left it up to a mystery....but I fessed up and paid for what I did. I'm an honest person and that is what u do.

I just choose not to insure my lil pickup. When I lived in Cal I had ALL my vehicles insured cus it was state law. Out here u don't have to, so I have chosen not to insure some vehicles. I will take full responsibility for my actions, they are mine and no one elses. I don't drive with anyone in the uninsured vehicles EVER so I never put a passenger at risk.

laws are well and good, but the prosecution and enforcement are sorely lacking. Me personally tax money would be better invested in more police and courts than in helping some charity cause or pet project. Honestly how much money goes to the schools out here is bar none INSANE. I have never seen a more bleeding heart everyone should have the opportunity to do what they want approach. Stop wasting my tax money. end off subject rant :rolf

See, that is an AWESOME work ethic. SERIOUSLY. If everyone thought like that, then this world would be a better place. The ONLY problem I see, is that a bigger accident then denting a pickup, is gonna be more than $2000. And a $20,000 medical/hospital bill after a simple ambulance ride is not gonna be so easy to just "work off" and after awhile it's gonna go to collections. THEN what happens is my health insurance pays it and goes after YOU in an at-fault accident. Then YOU"LL have the collection and good luck getting a house and/or any kind of loan.

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 09:09 AM

Chris,

I do not have health insurance either tho I can afford it. Another choice I made. Do these things worry me at times, certainly. I am an independent at 26 years of age with my yearly income well above poverty. Any debt I incure is and will be solely my own. I know alot of people see my view as being very askew and I understand where they are coming from.

Todd Z

01-04-2008, 09:17 AM

Just because you make it a law does NOT mean that everybody will follow the the law. If that was the case we would have no crime, illegals, etc. My dad is a retired agent and I know the case used to be that if insurance was mandatory it would not lower our rates but in fact raise them. You can always have uninsured motorist on your policy.

Wisconsin is not one of the more expensive states for insurance just taxes and health care.

Yooformula

01-04-2008, 09:43 AM

I say yes. Lowers insurance for the rest of the public plus gives the cops and extra way to get illegals into the legal system but ticketing them and arresting them for not having insurance. Other states that have it have a min of liability coverage which at least covers the other drivers if not your own car. All of my cars have it INCLUDING my beaters. FTR, if your car is in storage you can store it with just comprehensive coverage and anything that happens in storage will be covered, at least that is how my coverage is and I only pay $15 a month while in storage.

Yooformula

01-04-2008, 09:45 AM

voted no, some of my vehicles are registered and never see the road....y the hell should I have to insure them for that??

I do daily drive my pos that is uninsured as well...... accident aren't 'accidents' there is always reason behind them....... don't drive like a sausage and you will never find yourself in one

WRONG. my wife was sitting pumping gas and an assclown backed into her hard enough to wreck the hood, bumper, grill and dent the fender. She was doing NOTHING wrong. Alot of accidents are caused by the OTHER sausage on the road. Of the 3 accidents I have been in, NONE were my fault.

Yooformula

01-04-2008, 09:48 AM

Slow Joe

01-04-2008, 09:49 AM

The reason I say yes is because when we were rearended a bumper cover with paint, etc was over $1500, plus the rental car... And the girl that hit me sent her dad out to be the "claims adjuster" luckily they had insurance because he offered me $300 to have my car repaired...

I was stopped sitting at a stoplight, just so you know... Not driving like said sausage...

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 09:50 AM

WRONG. my wife was sitting pumping gas and an assclown backed into her hard enough to wreck the hood, bumper, grill and dent the fender. She was doing NOTHING wrong. Alot of accidents are caused by the OTHER sausage on the road. Of the 3 accidents I have been in, NONE were my fault.

understood and when you are not at fault it is the OTHER driver's responsibility to pay for the damage whether or not you yourself have insurance. another annoyance in this state is your something like 5% at fault just for having a car....

Want_Notch

01-04-2008, 09:56 AM

Its simple. No proof of insurance, your vehicle gets towed and impounded until you have proof.

03CVLX

01-04-2008, 10:03 AM

I got hit by an uninsured motorist driving his cousins uninsured truck back in 2004. I had top coverage on everything luckily and my insurance company found him and worked out a deal to pay it back. He is paying $75 bucks a month until the $ 10,000 grand or so in medical and vehicle bills are paid for. I would fully support for the switch to mandatory auto insurance.

juicedimpss

01-04-2008, 10:07 AM

I say yes. Lowers insurance for the rest of the public .

i doubt it would lower insurance prices. IMO it makes the insurance companies have an upper hand knowing that you NEED them,therefore there is a higher demand,causing prices to actually go up.

Windsors 03 Cobra

01-04-2008, 10:20 AM

I didnt vote and I'm not going to because even with a law all the people who dont register and insure their car will still be doing the same things, most dont care about other people. Scammer plates and no insruance, common as hell all over the U.S.

I remember that days that I could not afford insurance and drove without it, it wasnt the smartest thing to do, then I had insurance on my daily driver, the old 2wd junk truck I used once in awhile I didnt insure and I got caught in the snow one day and had the back of the truck kickout trying to drive in a bunch of snow on the way to work the bumper hit the front fender of a 95 sentra, cost me $1700. Now all my JUNK has insurance, I dont want to hit a $50,000 Caddy and be without insurance.

xxsn0blindxx

01-04-2008, 10:29 AM

I believe the current law is that you must have insurance or $10,000 available at any time. Obviously anybody who has $10,000 laying around can probably afford insurance. So all of you driving around without insurance are breaking the law unless you have a pile of cash just sitting around.

Requiring vehicles to be insured is a no-brainer. If you drive a beater then get liability insurance. Spending more than the value of a $500 beater to insure it may not feel like the right thing to do, but it isn't the value of the car being driven that you're insuring it's the value of the vehicular damage and medical treatment that would be incurred should you get into an accident. The safest driver in the world could have an equipment failure that can cause an accident.

If you blow a tire on the freeway and wipe out somebody's car, they shouldn't have to foot the repair bill. I don't care if you have every intention of paying off your debt, if you total out somebody's car and they don't have underinsured/uninsured motorist coverage, then you've just totally screwed them. I'm sorry but if you total my paid off $20,000 car and I only have liability insurance, your good work ethic and promise to make good on debts doesn't mean jack because I'm without a car and no money to buy a new one.

Nix

01-04-2008, 10:38 AM

yes and YES. How could you say no? To many deadbeats and illegals.:flipoff2:

juicedimpss

01-04-2008, 10:48 AM

yes and YES. How could you say no? To many deadbeats and illegals.:flipoff2:

problem is,the deadbeats will still drive illegally.

07ROUSHSTG3

01-04-2008, 10:48 AM

yes without a doubt. there are too many losers driving POS cars that really don;t care. so instead we pay higher rates, and in the event that one of these pieces of human trash hit you, there is really nothing that you can do.

i think that eventually it will happen here.

Karps TA

01-04-2008, 10:48 AM

Exactly. The funny thing about criminals and illegals, they don't seem to care about laws.

pickardracing

01-04-2008, 10:53 AM

MAKE me pay hundreds of dollars a year to get exactly NOTHING in return?

Sorry, not having it.

Ask me to do it, I'll consider it. FORCE me to do it, and you can go **** yourself.

xxsn0blindxx

01-04-2008, 11:08 AM

Want_Notch

01-04-2008, 11:12 AM

Use the public roads then pay the price otherwise take the bus or walk.

Thank you.....I don't get why people feel they don't need or are offended by paying for insurance. It's not about getting something in return. It's about protecting yourself and your FAMILY if something does happen. Although like I said before it is way to easy for them to file for bankruptcy to get out of paying for anything if they do get into an accident so what do they care, it will be the tax payers and RESPONSIBLE peoples problem them......

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 11:42 AM

Use the public roads then pay the price otherwise take the bus or walk. Do you have $10k laying around? If not you're already breaking the law. The choice is insure your vehicle or keep a pile of cash on hand in case of an accident.

gonna need someone to site a wis statute....if that is true than I do need to get insurance as I have that in assets but not in the bankroll

Rhiannon

01-04-2008, 11:43 AM

Put my zip code into the system and it says I should be paying $480.00 a month for just one of my vehicles. They say it's because of the area I live in...... So I just use my ex-husband's zip code and I pay $127.00 a month for all of my vehicles. I think if we should have a mandatory auto insurance law because maybe it'll keep all the scum bags in my neighborhood off the streets. ROAD RAGE!!!!

u_say_go

01-04-2008, 11:44 AM

Every state should adopt the mandatory insurance policy! If you can't afford insurance, dont drive! Or if you refuse to pay for it because you feel you arent getting something in return, or think you'll never get in a wreck...you're too big of an idiot to even be on the road!
I was in West Virginia a few years back and was told by the locals that if you dont have insurance on any car or motorcycle that is registered, the state can and will come to your house in the middle of the night and take the plates off your car!:thumbsup that's the way it should be!

Want_Notch

01-04-2008, 11:53 AM

MAKE me pay hundreds of dollars a year to get exactly NOTHING in return?

Sorry, not having it.

Ask me to do it, I'll consider it. FORCE me to do it, and you can go **** yourself.

Are you really serious?

No really......are you?

hrsp

01-04-2008, 11:54 AM

hrsp

01-04-2008, 11:56 AM

another thing real quick...seems like people avoid reporting any kind of accident to there insurance companys cause there afraid there rates would go thru the roof..so they just pay out of pocket for most things...this is what ive seen..i (knock on wood) have never been in an accident of any sort...but i know of people doing this...

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 12:19 PM

i feel that being told YOU HAVE TO HAVE AUTO INSURANCE is like saying you have to have renters insurance or any other form of insurance..you should have it no doubt..but to be forced to pay for it would be ridiculous...

and if it were a law whats to stop insurance companys from jacking up there rates even higher because they know you HAVE to pay for it...

free society...people make choices..we cant go around forcing people to be responsible worry about yourself and all will be well

thank you, that was my main point :thumbsup

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 12:25 PM

We do have mandatory insurance :confused

You just don't have to show proof to a police officer if you're pulled over or if you register your car :confused in CA and other border states illegals without insurance are far bigger problems there than here, yet you have to show proof of insurance to a police officer who pulls you over or to register your car.

84hurst

01-04-2008, 12:26 PM

Having Renter's insurance and Health insurance are completely different than having auto insurance. You can only f*ck over yourself without those. You f*ck someone else over if you cause an accident. It happened to my mom a few years ago. She was rearended by another chick that didn't have insurance. Who paid for the damage? My mom. She had to fork over the $500 deductible for no reason. She shouldn't have had to pay a cent for an accident that wasn't her fault! The stupid ***** without insurance should have paid for everything. At least my mom finally got the deductible back 3 years later after the *****'s wages were garnished. And if you are driving on the road without insurance, what happens when there's the freak, unavoidable accident that's half your fault, and half the other guys? You get stuck paying for half the damage. If you're behind the wheel, eventually an accident will happen. I've ALWAYS had insurance. Is it expensive? Not really. I'm 24 and pay $525 for 3 cars for six months. My point is, you end up protecting yourself in case the unthinkable happens. You're retarded if you think you don't need it.

floaters

01-04-2008, 12:29 PM

ive had 2 friends that got hit and the other drivers dont have insurance and nothing happens its rediculous so now my friends are stuck with dents and smashed up bumpers why should they have to pay their premiums and use their own insurance. its a joke

DynoTom

01-04-2008, 12:33 PM

We do have mandatory insurance :confused

Wisconsin is one of a handful of states that doesn't mandate auto insurance, unless you have certain traffic tickets and need to keep your license.

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 12:38 PM

Wisconsin is one of a handful of states that doesn't mandate auto insurance, unless you have certain traffic tickets and need to keep your license.

Molly's mom works at the DMV and told me that if you get into an accident you have to prove you were insured at the time (unless you can pay for the damages) :confused but then some people in this thread are saying otherwise. My insurance policy even has a section which mentions which liability amount is considered the state minimum.

DynoTom

01-04-2008, 12:45 PM

About 15 percent of drivers in Wisconsin don't have insurance, according to industry reps.
By Doug Hissom
Special to OnMilwaukee.com

E-mail author | Author bio
More articles by Doug Hissom

Published Dec. 7, 2007 at 5:17 a.m.
It's been a few years, but the idea of mandatory car insurance once again is buzzing about the bonnets of a few lawmakers.

State Sen. John Lehman (D-Racine) is circulating a bill in Madison that would require all drivers to carry insurance providing coverage of up to $50,000 for personal injury and $10,000 for property damage.

Uninsured drivers are not exactly the scourges of the road. Lehman cites a study by the Insurance Research Council that found one in seven drivers is without insurance. About 15 percent of drivers in Wisconsin don't have insurance, according to industry reps.

Wisconsin is one of a handful of states that doesn't mandate auto insurance, unless you have certain traffic tickets and need to keep your license. That's also the reason it has one of the lowest insurance prices in the country, according to insurance expert Greg Felzer, of American Family.

Felzer said the Badger State, with an average annual rate of $613.81, ranks 47th nationally in auto insurance rates. There is a noticeable drop-off in rates between mandatory and non-mandatory states.

The insurance industry is not likely to drive headlong in support of this bill. If insurance companies have to insure all drivers, including the idiots, good drivers have to pay more because the risk would substantially increase, Felzer says. Lehman says his bill would make roads safer.

"Bad drivers are still going to be bad drivers," Felzer counters.

His advice? Buy enough insurance coverage to protect yourself and don't worry about the other guy.

formul8

01-04-2008, 01:09 PM

Auto Insurance is mandatory for registered vehicles in Illinois. If it wasn't, our rates would be astronomical.

Oh, and there is a nice $500 fine if caught without it.

Windsors 03 Cobra

01-04-2008, 01:11 PM

Some real mind boggling responses on this one, just proving my point about people not having any respect for other folks and other folks shit.

I drive JUNK $100 dollar cars and they are insured. Just cause you drive junk dont mean everyone else does, and if you drive uninsured junk you must be poor, so how you gonna pay for grandmas $50,000 caddy and back surgery when you plow into the back of her car ?

Oh thats right dont drive like a sausage, nice plan........ :D

Windsors 03 Cobra

01-04-2008, 01:13 PM

Auto Insurance is mandatory for registered vehicles in Illinois. If it wasn't, our rates would be astronomical.

Oh, and there is a nice $500 fine if caught without it.

I bet half the cars IL impounds for not having insurance go unclaimed, the sausages that drive these $40 dollar cars just go get another $40 car and some new scammer plates and they are back on the road.
And of course not a damn one of em even has a valid drivers license.:rolleyes:

xxsn0blindxx

01-04-2008, 02:00 PM

Karps TA

01-04-2008, 02:04 PM

xxsn0blindxx

01-04-2008, 02:05 PM

gonna need someone to site a wis statute....if that is true than I do need to get insurance as I have that in assets but not in the bankroll

I'm not certain if this is what I'm looking for or not. It would make sense that your minimum insruance requirements would be the minimum you would be obligated to be able to pay at any given time.

Proof of financial responsibility is certifying that you have liability insurance in the amounts of at least $25,000 and $50,000 for personal injury or death and $10,000 for property damage.

07ROUSHSTG3

01-04-2008, 02:13 PM

people on the road without insurance are all selfish pieces of sh!t with no consideration or respect for anyone or anything. if only there would be a way to group all these human piles of garbage together and send them off a cliff in a greyhound. the government should not have to tell you to have auto insurance, anyone with half a brain already has it. the law says not to have sex with farm animals, only people that **** sheep have a problem with that law, and it is no difference with this law. anyone here, on a fricken car site of all places, that does not have insurance and shares public roadways with me..... F_U_C_K OFF! if you cannot afford auto insurance maybe spending money on internet access is not the best life decision.

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 02:14 PM

I have seen that before but can't find a reference to proof on insurance for personal vehicle licenses...only cdl and limo

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 02:20 PM

Not that it excuses people without insurance, but guys this is a good reason to make sure you have uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage.

DynoTom

01-04-2008, 02:20 PM

07ROUSHSTG3

01-04-2008, 02:23 PM

Not that it excuses people without insurance, but guys this is a good reason to make sure you have uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage.

yeah, good point. the honest, hard working, non retarded people of the world will once again pick up the slack for the welfare deserving bunch of inbreds that we are forced to live with.:fire

07ROUSHSTG3

01-04-2008, 02:26 PM

I still think too many of you are thinking like a rational law abiding citizen and are assuming everyone thinks that way.

The people that are not carrying insurance now, most likely still won't even with a law. That's just how they roll.

yeah but if there were a law, you could atleast have an option to go after the deadbeats when they smash your car up.

now there is really nothing you can do.

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 02:26 PM

yeah, good point. the honest, hard working, non retarded people of the world will once again pick up the slack for the welfare deserving bunch of inbreds that we are forced to live with.:fire

So go become a welfare deserving inbred? :loser

I was just posting an idea to help protect some of us, I think for most of us it's worth the small fee to have our car (especially our toy) covered in case of someone without insurance, whether they happen to be an idiot or just got the car and their insurance company is retarded and won't cover it. And it's cheap too, compared to liability and collision.

Prince Valiant

01-04-2008, 02:26 PM

I support it because of this:

If the drivers are pulled over without insurance, they are busted for it.

I know that one may still find themselves up the creek, and hit by somone without it...

And if people are in an accident and don't have insurance, there should be laws that hold them financially responsible if it was their fault...and not just allow them to declare bankrupcy or anything (as this happened to me when an uninsured driver totaled my old jeep).

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 02:28 PM

07ROUSHSTG3

01-04-2008, 02:31 PM

isn't having a under/uninsured policy mandatory when taking out a full coverage insurance policy???

Want_Notch

01-04-2008, 02:32 PM

How can you hold someone financially responsible who has no money? :confused

That's the whole problem......my folks are still waiting to be paid when they got hit by a deadbeat......8 ******* years ago............They garnished his wages, so he quit his job never to be heard from again.

07ROUSHSTG3

01-04-2008, 02:33 PM

How can you hold someone financially responsible who has no money? :confused

garnish wages
sieze ALL assets

how do you think they do it when someone loses a lawsuit for millions??? there are ways, or you go to jail.

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 02:33 PM

isn't having a under/uninsured policy mandatory when taking out a full coverage insurance policy???

Not sure. I remember doing my newest policy when I moved to WI (I was on my mom's policy before that) that you had to do something different to get comp/collision and uninsured/underinsured, but shrug.

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 02:35 PM

That's the whole problem......my folks are still waiting to be paid when they got hit by a deadbeat......8 ******* years ago............They garnished his wages, so he quit his job never to be heard from again.

See that is the problem though, you squeeze someone too hard, and they will have no point in working. Heh. Better off for them to just go to another country and start over than constantly paying someone back.

07ROUSHSTG3

01-04-2008, 02:35 PM

Not sure. I remember doing my newest policy when I moved to WI (I was on my mom's policy before that) that you had to do something different to get comp/collision and uninsured/underinsured, but shrug.

yeah, i am not sure about comp/collision policys, but i am almost positive that on a full coverage plan, you HAVE to pay the extra uninsured/underinsured fee! that does not seem right to me. why make us pay for them, but no such thingon the other side???

07ROUSHSTG3

01-04-2008, 02:36 PM

See that is the problem though, you squeeze someone too hard, and they will have no point in working. Heh. Better off for them to just go to another country and start over than constantly paying someone back.

doesn;t sound to bad to me :thumbsup

Want_Notch

01-04-2008, 02:37 PM

I have uninsured/underinsured on the three vehicles I still owe on. Plus Gap.....ughh.

Cutlass Queen

01-04-2008, 02:41 PM

All my toys are - bike, car, etc. Even if it's in storage I'm still paying to make sure nothing happens to them. It's more of an investment of saving your ass in the long run. I've been backed into enough and hit in parking lots not to even risk it.

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 02:45 PM

doesn;t sound to bad to me :thumbsup

Unless you're the one they hit. Would you rather just take what you can out of them without squeezing them so hard that they just stiff you or would you rather they just leave and you get nothing?

yeah, i am not sure about comp/collision policys, but i am almost positive that on a full coverage plan, you HAVE to pay the extra uninsured/underinsured fee! that does not seem right to me. why make us pay for them, but no such thingon the other side???

I guess, but what are you going to do about it? Best thing would be mandatory insurance, but then I'd like the rates to be regulated.

All my toys are - bike, car, etc. Even if it's in storage I'm still paying to make sure nothing happens to them. It's more of an investment of saving your ass in the long run. I've been backed into enough and hit in parking lots not to even risk it.

Guys Deanna has the right idea. It's always a good idea to just protect your own ass.

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 02:48 PM

Guys Deana has the right idea. It's always a good idea to just protect your own ass.

I insure the ones I car about..... the pos and the work at home truck nope

i corrected the spelling btw :thumbsup

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 02:51 PM

I insure the ones I car about..... the pos and the work at home truck nope

i corrected the spelling btw :thumbsup

Sorry, I went to high school with a Deanna. Hehe.

Cutlass Queen

01-04-2008, 03:04 PM

I insure the ones I car about..... the pos and the work at home truck nope

i corrected the spelling btw :thumbsup

You should insure any of them, all mine have full and if not atleast fire and theft. Hell even my Cutlass, Iroc, and bike have it even though they are all sitting right now.

Sorry, I went to high school with a Deanna. Hehe.

I'm so use to it now sis, I just ignore the spelling lol

Prince Valiant

01-04-2008, 03:10 PM

How can you hold someone financially responsible who has no money? :confusedEasy...people do make money except for a very very small few. Garnish wages/welfare/take what she has that can be sold/whatever.

Keep in mind that the person who hit me was rolling around in a kia that was less than a year old. Still, things like paying for insurance was putting too much of a crimp on her lifestyle so she decided to drop it (hey...she HAD to have her leather jacket, smokes, CD's, internet, cable tv, and crap like that). Hell, she probably figured that the payments on the thing were too much of a crimp on her lifestyle too...

So tell me, why do you think I should be financially accountable for her lack of responsibility? That is utter BS. Not only was I out money, but because she hit me into someone else, my insurance had to pay them. Complete BS. People like that are trash.

Hell, if I were to get in an accident without insurance and I caused injury/loss of property you *@mn well better believe I'd probably loose my house, cars, etc...as I should. Why should she get this kind of protection? BS! :mad:

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 03:19 PM

Easy...people do make money except for a very very small few. Garnish wages/welfare/take what she has that can be sold/whatever.

Keep in mind that the person who hit me was rolling around in a kia that was less than a year old. Still, things like paying for insurance was putting too much of a crimp on her lifestyle so she decided to drop it (hey...she HAD to have her leather jacket, smokes, CD's, internet, cable tv, and crap like that). Hell, she probably figured that the payments on the thing were too much of a crimp on her lifestyle too...

So tell me, why do you think I should be financially accountable for her lack of responsibility? That is utter BS.

Hell, if I were to get in an accident without insurance and I caused injury/loss of property you *@mn well better believe I'd probably loose my house, cars, etc...as I should. Why should she get this kind of protection? BS! :mad:

I never said you should be responsible and she shouldn't? *shrug* Just said there's only so much you can do against a person who has no money or significant assets. Yeah you'd lose your house if you had no insurance, but what are you going to do against a person with no house? Take their magical house that they pull out of their ass?

Like I said too you can garnish wages or take stuff but that only goes so far. You try to take everything someone has and garnish their wages into oblivion, well, they'll be on the next international flight. :rolf

Prince Valiant

01-04-2008, 03:28 PM

I never said you should be responsible and she shouldn't? Here's the deal...if she declares bankruptcy, then guess whose responsible? Me. If bankruptcy is left as a legal avenue to protect someone from debtors in this situation, then guess what, you've given them blanket and easy protection...something I wouldn't have because a court would look at my assesst and say there's plenty of ways for me to pay. Why does the court think that it's insurmountable for someone to pay me back the 15G I was out in the deal? Hell, I'll gladly accept a couple thousand a year until I'm fully reimbursed.

And as I said, I'm all for taking any asset that the person has. AND we know that the person would likely be working in the future...I'm all for taking 25% of their gross pay, all tax-returns, any awards collected (should she be plantiff in a suit at some point, any awards aside from damages, ie punitive, would be passed on to me).

And if that person turns to identity theft to by-pass payments, let them get caught and put in prison. Suits me fine.

pickardracing

01-04-2008, 03:45 PM

So you're saying that it should be LAW - Repeat, LAW - for EVERY SINGLE PERSON who drives on public roads to give money to a PRIVATE ENTERPRISE on the sole basis of a POSSIBILITY?

The ONLY way i see that proposition as fair is if it's GOVERNMENT-RUN, and taken out of my taxes.

As far as I see it, it would be (and is, in some states) complete horseshit to force, by law, a person to submit earnings to a PRIVATE enterprise.

By that logic you guys who think this is a good idea should all then support Law Enforced mandatory donations to churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples because there is a RISK of Satan coming for your souls.

Sound ridiculous? IT IS.

SSDude

01-04-2008, 03:55 PM

Who here honestly believes their insurance rate will go down if insurance was mandatory in Wisconsin.:goof

Not a chance inHell:fire

pickardracing

01-04-2008, 03:56 PM

Who here honestly believes their insurance rate will go down if insurance was mandatory in Wisconsin.:goof

Not a chance inHell:fire

Agreed. Greed is universal.

formul8

01-04-2008, 04:03 PM

Here's the deal...if she declares bankruptcy, then guess whose responsible? Me. If bankruptcy is left as a legal avenue to protect someone from debtors in this situation, then guess what, you've given them blanket and easy protection.

AFAIK, bankruptcy does not erase garnishments or payments from civil suits.

If that were the case, O.J. would have gone BK years ago.

Insurance is just CYA. Amazing how people think it is a waste of money. I think it is dirt cheap when an at-fault accident can cost me tons of money if I didn't have it, instead it only costs me $600/yr.

You either believe in insurance, or you don't.

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 04:06 PM

Here's the deal...if she declares bankruptcy, then guess whose responsible? Me.

You're using responsibility in a different sense here. Yeah, you might lose your stuff and lose your money, but you don't have to pay anyone else... And sure, a lot of people might be able to pay back 15G but what if the damages were 15M? Might as well ask them to pay you 15 bajillion dollars :rolf

If bankruptcy is left as a legal avenue to protect someone from debtors in this situation, then guess what, you've given them blanket and easy protection...something I wouldn't have because a court would look at my assesst and say there's plenty of ways for me to pay.

Maybe maybe not. What if someone sued you for $15 million, $15 billion, or some other amount of money you'll never see in your lifetime. Guess what, they'll take all your stuff too, but you'll probably end up declaring bankruptcy yourself. Are you a deadbeat then too? Would someone with $200,000 worth of assets and insufficient insurance be a deadbeat too? Or would only the $2,000 person with no insurance be the deadbeat?

Why does the court think that it's insurmountable for someone to pay me back the 15G I was out in the deal? Hell, I'll gladly accept a couple thousand a year until I'm fully reimbursed.

Not sure about your specific case.

And as I said, I'm all for taking any asset that the person has. AND we know that the person would likely be working in the future...I'm all for taking 25% of their gross pay, all tax-returns, any awards collected (should she be plantiff in a suit at some point, any awards aside from damages, ie punitive, would be passed on to me).

That's a more reasonable approach to it. Though what if they only have $500 in assets? You're just going to end up wasting the court's time (and more than $500 of we taxpayer's money) than anything else.

And if that person turns to identity theft to by-pass payments, let them get caught and put in prison. Suits me fine.

Might be vindicating, but accomplishes nothing (except wasting more tax payer money).

Breecher_7

01-04-2008, 04:09 PM

Yes, Yes, and YES!!! If you dont have insurance, you dont belong on the road. Period.

Ricky Bobby

01-04-2008, 04:14 PM

i voted yes, since ive had my license always had a car that was insured in some way

Yooformula

01-04-2008, 04:24 PM

perfect example yet again. My brother in law comes over to show me his minivan.....a school bus turns left from the RIGHT lane and took the entire front end off his van! He was doing nothing wrong and just driving the speed limit minding his own business not driving like a sausage. Now HIS insurance has to pay out of pocket until they can get reimbursed from the city. Good thing they have insurance otherwise he would be screwed if his had to pay for all of the damages. this took place at 3pm today!

nismodave

01-04-2008, 04:30 PM

People in this state that dont have insurance will never have it, law or not.

I dont think it should be a law.

05caddyext

01-04-2008, 04:48 PM

So you're saying that it should be LAW - Repeat, LAW - for EVERY SINGLE PERSON who drives on public roads to give money to a PRIVATE ENTERPRISE on the sole basis of a POSSIBILITY?

Do you have insurance on anything you own? Renters insurance? Home owners insurance? Life insurance? Health insurance?

What happens if you think you are an excellent driver right? But one day you slide on some ice and hit some rich guys kid whos driving his/her 50,000 dollar bmw?? You think you'll be alright in that case?

Insurance should be mandatory, hands down. And yes, I do believe that insurance rates would go down if it were mandatory. There would be a lot more competition because everyone would need it. If your theory on a price increase were true, why aren't cell phones 1000 bucks? Everyone has one, why not charge tons of cash for them? Simple. competition increased as the demand went up. Same would hold true for insurance.

70challenger452

01-04-2008, 04:51 PM

I don't support the government telling people what they can or can't do, so I'm gunna say no, but I just think it's stupid not to

Prince Valiant

01-04-2008, 04:58 PM

You're using responsibility in a different sense here. Yeah, you might lose your stuff and lose your money, but you don't have to pay anyone else... And sure, a lot of people might be able to pay back 15G but what if the damages were 15M? Might as well ask them to pay you 15 bajillion dollars :rolf 15G was all that person would have been responsible for. She filed bankruptcy and therefore it was on me. And YES, I did have to pay somone else. Learn a little about the law.

Maybe maybe not. What if someone sued you for $15 million, $15 billion, or some other amount of money you'll never see in your lifetime. Guess what, they'll take all your stuff too, but you'll probably end up declaring bankruptcy yourself. Are you a deadbeat then too? Would someone with $200,000 worth of assets and insufficient insurance be a deadbeat too? Or would only the $2,000 person with no insurance be the deadbeat? Uh, why don't you keep this based in reality. 15 million? 15 billion? Be pretty hard to cause damages approaching either figure.

At least if someone with 200,000 in assest get's into an accident, I could recover from them what was rightfully mine fairly easy as ordered by a court. I should be able to do that from the person with 2,000 in assest...shouldn't be any easier for them to file bankruptcy.

Not sure about your specific case.Really? :rolleyes:

And if someone only has 500 dollars in assest doesn't mean that don't make money...AND it doesn't mean they aren't capable of paying back through garnishment. This is a fairly standard approach taken by courts in cases where people don't have the money upfront.

Might be vindicating, but accomplishes nothing (except wasting more tax payer money).No, it punishes people (*the whole point of the justice system*) who don't live up to their obligations under the law. Sure, doesn't help me get my money back, but doesn't let them off scot-free either.

Z28Roxy

01-04-2008, 05:09 PM

Uh, why don't you keep this based in reality. 15 million? 15 billion? Be pretty hard to cause damages approaching either figure.

Who did you have to pay? :confused

And while unlikely, you still ignored my question. Fine, what if it's $500,000 damages?

At least if someone with 200,000 in assest get's into an accident, I could recover from them what was rightfully mine fairly easy as ordered by a court. I should be able to do that from the person with 2,000 in assest...shouldn't be any easier for them to file bankruptcy.

How are you going to make someone with no money pay?

Really? :rolleyes:

:flipoff:

And if someone only has 500 dollars in assest doesn't mean that don't make money...AND it doesn't mean they aren't capable of paying back through garnishment. This is a fairly standard approach taken by courts in cases where people don't have the money upfront.

Where did I disagree with you? :confused I was only saying if you did something like, garnish 95% of the salary (as opposed to 25%) there would be no point in them working here.

No, it punishes people (*the whole point of the justice system*) who don't live up to their obligations under the law. Sure, doesn't help me get my money back, but doesn't let them off scot-free either.

It would be punishing someone for identity theft :confused

WickedSix

01-04-2008, 05:36 PM

Why hello mr can, do you contain worms??

http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/2146328/2/istockphoto_2146328_food_tin_can_on_white.jpg
I most certainly do not contain worms

a little bit later......

http://skugg.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/can-of-worms.jpg

you are a filthy liar mr. can....

PB86MCSS

01-04-2008, 06:23 PM

Funny, the only time I've been in an accident was last winter and the old douchebag had no insurance. Was fun getting him to pay, finally ponied up $400 for my whacked bumper. Sure, you can go through the legal system to try and get the culprit to pay over time, but that just sucks. A girl I work with got her car flipped over on Brady St Opening Day in 06' (thats not important other than the girl responsible was drunk, probably from that) and she had no insurance. Rich girl supposedly, but took a good year or so for the garnishment checks to arrive to my co-worker for her injuries, one by one a whopping $60 at a time per month or something. I don't like the government telling people what to do or not do but...

Mandatory insurance for every registered driver, please. I don't see the positive of not having it that way.

if she declares bankruptcy, then guess whose responsible? Me

I think it depends if its a Chapter 7 or 13....7 wipes the debt, 13 is a re-structuring. I'm not sure how that works with garnishments, I'd think they continue if it originated before any bankruptcy filing.

u_say_go

01-04-2008, 07:41 PM

bottom line here is, if you refuse to carry auto insurance- you're an idiot. I dont care if it's a $13 beater with a heater or a $200,000 Lambo, BE RESPONSIBLE AND GET CAR INSURANCE!
Mandatory law or not, there's no reasonable explanation not have it. Period.

pOrk

01-04-2008, 07:57 PM

I don't know this, but do you still live at your parents? Because if you do, by not having insurance, even if you are over 18y/o, that person you MIGHT hit, can then sue your parents for their medical bills/car repairs/etc...

^ If he pays rent, it doesn't matter where or who he lives with. My old mans insurance agent tried to pull that shit so he could get me to pay him. I was already paying Progressive and less then half of his rate. Sucker.

Liability is a minimum for anything over 500 pounds. I would support it only because so many people don't have ANY insurance.

pickardracing

01-04-2008, 08:11 PM

DirtyMax

01-04-2008, 11:55 PM

Yes, Yes, and YES!!! If you dont have insurance, you dont belong on the road. Period.

/thread

My $.02

I carry full insurance on everything and if I get whacked by a dipshit who's not insured, sure my insurance will cover it, right before they jack up my premium. Someone's gotta make up for the payout on the claim. Insurance companies don't prosper by being charitable.

Sound fair? It isn't.. unless you're on the flip side on this. Then you're thinkin git'r'dun dats what I'm talkin about.

If had no home, no assets, and no pot to piss in, I might feel differently but as it is I've got too much to lose if I was liable for something big, as do I bet most people here do. If at my age all I "owned" was the shirt on my back and a Wii, and had no regard for what I might do to someone else's property or well-being, then well besides wanting to rent a gun and buy a bullet, I guess I may have another mindset about all of this.

lordairgtar

01-05-2008, 12:56 AM

I have my cars insured. I'm not wealthy and it would sure be nice not to have that bill to pay every month, but 23 years ago, I hit someone on the very first day I bought auto insurance just by backing up without looking. Did no damage to my car, but basically required the other car to need an entire front suspension plus attendant body work (God, those 85 Escorts are junk.) I agree with 4eyed, gotta protect your own assets no matter how little they may be.

nitroxtreme

01-05-2008, 08:23 AM

i doubt it would lower insurance prices. IMO it makes the insurance companies have an upper hand knowing that you NEED them,therefore there is a higher demand,causing prices to actually go up.

I would vote NO.. Like what was said here.. It gives the insurance companys the upper hand. The responsible people have insurance and the others dont. Making it a law does nothing but jack up our rates because, because WE are now locked in and have to have it..Insurance companys would stop competing for people and set one rate...

Now I just got a notice from my insurance company saying that my insurance may go Up..Now they are going by credit score...What the hell does that have to do with insurance.. I have been with the same company for 12 years have 4 vehicles and a home and never a claim or a ticket, my wife and I both( last time I checked I can only drive 1 vehicle at a time).. So first they get you by were you live, what you drive, how many claims or tickets you have. and now your credit.. If they mandatory it just them another angle to charge you MORE....

Yooformula

01-05-2008, 10:08 AM

See having lived in NJ and Florida, insurance was cheaper in both states than here and they have mandatory insurance. Since more people were insured that meant more agents competing for your business so you could go through the phone book and get a wide range of prices unlike here....3 or 4 places and all the price are the same or damm near close to it.

xxsn0blindxx

01-05-2008, 11:57 AM

So you're saying that it should be LAW - Repeat, LAW - for EVERY SINGLE PERSON who drives on public roads to give money to a PRIVATE ENTERPRISE on the sole basis of a POSSIBILITY?

Absolutely. Unless there is 100% guaranty that you can cover the cost of repairing/replacing any vehicle on the road, cover the medical bills of anyone harmed and pay for the loss of income to anybody killed that you might accidentally hit, then yes everybody should have to have insurance.

The ONLY way i see that proposition as fair is if it's GOVERNMENT-RUN, and taken out of my taxes.

Yeah that would be awesome! Government run agencies fuc.king rock, I'd love to go to the DMV to make an insurance claim :chair: Yeah it totally makes sense for it to be taken out of taxes because it makes sense for me to subsidize your auto insurance. Sorry, just because I make more money doesn't mean I'm obligated to help you pay for shit.

As far as I see it, it would be (and is, in some states) complete horseshit to force, by law, a person to submit earnings to a PRIVATE enterprise.

Nobody's forcing anybody to do that. If you choose to drive then you need to pony up. Does the government give you a car if you decide to drive? Hell no, you submit your earnings to a PRIVATE enterprise. If your public high school doesn't have a driver's ed program you have to go to a private driving school and pay them your earnings. It's just another cost of earning the privilege to drive on public roads.

By that logic you guys who think this is a good idea should all then support Law Enforced mandatory donations to churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples because there is a RISK of Satan coming for your souls.

Sound ridiculous? IT IS.

No it sounds rediculous because it makes no ******* sense in regards to having auto insurance. If you are driving a car that is capable of costing thousands, and in the case of a fatality millions, of dollars it should absolutely be mandatory to have auto insurance.

For anybody who does not think they need auto insurance answer this question. What would you do if your tire blew out on the highway and you slammed into another car. The driver of the car is killed, leaving his wife and kids with no bread winner. Assume he makes $80k per year, has no life insurance and his wife cannot earn enough money to support their kids. What are you going to do about it since you don't have insurance to at least provide the family with the loss of income?

My guess is the family is basically screwed because your deadbeat ass didn't have insurance and there's no possible way that you can repay them. Please tell me how I'm wrong.

nitroxtreme

01-05-2008, 12:57 PM

I understand.. YOU SHOULD HAVE TO HAVE INSURANCE, But to make a Law out of it..Come on..The only thing that is going to do is screw the little guy..

The last time I checked it WAS AGAINST the law to drive without a licence, steal cars or shoot someone or how many other laws are out there that are broken ...Lets start at the sentencing...Convicted of driving without a licence 3 years, driving without a licence and do personal property damage and or personal damage..5-10 years.. Shoot someone..DEATH PENALTY..

If they make this a law and all of US abide with it..What does that all accomplish..WE HAVE INSURANCE..So now you have someone that has no licence and no insurance gets caught driving..What do they do...A ###### Fine, maybe after a little time jail...Thats not going to make these people stop doing it...Maybe they should say in this law: IF NO INSURANCE YOU CANT SUE...PERIOD.....

The good people will still pay the high insurance and well the others will dodge the LAW...

pickardracing

01-05-2008, 01:19 PM

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Say the sheeple

88Nightmare

01-05-2008, 02:02 PM

man its a tough call. Personally, I see this as the wisconsin government being able to issue just ONE more ticket to people. Seems like just another way for wisconsin to generate more income from tickets. if you make this a law, it will cause that many more people to drive without insurance. I just dont see this law making things any better.

PB86MCSS

01-05-2008, 05:02 PM

The only thing that is going to do is screw the little guy..

I guess I don't get it. Surely people will get around the law, like every other law but it would go a long way in helping out. The more on it the better....

I'm still waiting for a good defense to not make it law. Exactly who would get screwed by it?

Breecher_7

01-05-2008, 06:22 PM

If you have a financed vehicle, its mandatory that your vehicle is insured as per the loan contract with 99% of lenders. Id say atleast 70% of the people in this state have loans on there vehicles and are therefor already required to have insurance. For the other 30% of people, if you can afford to drive your car, you can afford a measily liability insurance payment.

Now as far as motorcycles are considered, and by motorcycles I mean "sport bikes", ones that fall into insurance companies top dollar premiums. I can understand why some people dont have FULL COVERAGE on these as some cases the insurance is probably more then your bike payment. On the other hand, in most cases these motorcycles are considered TOTALLED if there is a SCRATCH on the frame, this alone shoudl be enough for people to pay up for the insurance.

Ive discussed this before, bikes are expensive from the get go. The way I see it is if you cannot afford to pay cash for a motorcycle, you cant afford it.

Alot of this was senseless ramble but I wanted to say my piece....