Since punitive seems to be the mood of the day, how about if we do what they used to do in the old Uganda with DWI suspects.
The policeman stopping a suspected drunk had the authority to sumarily execute the drunk right there on the street.
Stops repeat offenders.
Just shoot the uninsured.
Yep, there\’s definitely something to be said about strict laws. . . there are plenty of strict laws already on the books, but getting the law enforced is the problem. If laws were immediately enforced, society would begin to get the picture, but police are overworked, and those hit and run cases, and measly no insurance or no license violations are simply too cumbersome to chase after, so the problem will always remain until enforcement becomes expected, instead of the mindset \”yeah, I\’ll sit my couple of days out in jail and be done with it\”. Read up on Ch. 601 (TX Trans. Code) if you are a victim of an uninsured motorist.
There is a mental condition for those in need of enforcement. A famous book 25 or so years ago described \”You\’re OK, I\’m OK, I\’m OK, you\’re not OK etc.\”
The mental condition that is dangerous is easily described as \”I\’m ok your\’re not ok, but I can make you ok if you do exactly as I say.\” It\’s called narcissism.
The extreme examples of this condition are manifested in famous dictators in history. It is a very dangerous mental disorder.
Heheh, I\’m a narcissist. Is that spelled right? Anyway, I\’m okay as far as financial responsibility goes, and it\’s expensive, so if you\’re not okay, then don\’t have a wreck with somebody that has insurance with Safeway insurance. I am not a repo man, that\’s way too dangerous. I\’m a recovery specialist. I recover money, and if needed, personal property to liquidate for the settlement of torts. In short, I enforce the financial responsibility law for a small amount of insured people in the State of Texas. I am working to recover money for victims of uninsured motorists and criminals.
So how do you ensure the driver/vehicle is insured? I think I have come up with a solution, and a national one at that!
Charge $5.00 per gallon of gas. Half goes toward the petrol itself the other half toward insurance. That way you know every car on the road has paid for insurance. No gas, no insurance, no driving. This solves the problem of impounding vehicles, databases, insurance cards etc. etc. etc. Moreover, the amount of gas/insurance a person buys would be proportionate to the amount of driving they do, (which, by the way, is supposedly proportionate to their risk). If you want to save on gas/insurance buy a more fuel-efficient vehicle (now we are even helping the environment!).
My only concern however is with the way Y’all think. God forbid you run out of gas in Texas… they will shoot you!
Good thinking, but what about the stolen vehicle, or the excluded driver that has no license. How would we know which vehicle is getting gas? It\’s something to think about, but it couldn\’t be a catch all, you know.
I was thinking more along the lines of a national no-fault insurance pool. Everyone (buying gas) pays in, every vehicle has coverage. (Ohhhh…the insurance companies are not going to like that – and I work for one shhhhhhhh)
Who pays now if the car is driven by a thief? (hopefully the criminal will run out of gas before he hits anyone).
How about…scan your valid driver\’s license at the pump to get gas?
\”They\” came up with this idea in California. I guess they figured (since they have a 365 day legislature that needed something to do) that if you bought gas in CA, but ran out of gas in LA, you would run out of insurance.
One thing we DON\’T want is federal legislation of insurance…unless your name is Ted Kennedy.
Plus, in Texas, your trial lawyers wouln\’t have as much to chase ambulances for.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
another english correction
Since punitive seems to be the mood of the day, how about if we do what they used to do in the old Uganda with DWI suspects.
The policeman stopping a suspected drunk had the authority to sumarily execute the drunk right there on the street.
Stops repeat offenders.
Just shoot the uninsured.
Yep, there\’s definitely something to be said about strict laws. . . there are plenty of strict laws already on the books, but getting the law enforced is the problem. If laws were immediately enforced, society would begin to get the picture, but police are overworked, and those hit and run cases, and measly no insurance or no license violations are simply too cumbersome to chase after, so the problem will always remain until enforcement becomes expected, instead of the mindset \”yeah, I\’ll sit my couple of days out in jail and be done with it\”. Read up on Ch. 601 (TX Trans. Code) if you are a victim of an uninsured motorist.
There is a mental condition for those in need of enforcement. A famous book 25 or so years ago described \”You\’re OK, I\’m OK, I\’m OK, you\’re not OK etc.\”
The mental condition that is dangerous is easily described as \”I\’m ok your\’re not ok, but I can make you ok if you do exactly as I say.\” It\’s called narcissism.
The extreme examples of this condition are manifested in famous dictators in history. It is a very dangerous mental disorder.
Me thinks perhaps \”recovery\” is the politically correct term for REPO MAN!
At any rate, I like the way he thinks!
Heheh, I\’m a narcissist. Is that spelled right? Anyway, I\’m okay as far as financial responsibility goes, and it\’s expensive, so if you\’re not okay, then don\’t have a wreck with somebody that has insurance with Safeway insurance. I am not a repo man, that\’s way too dangerous. I\’m a recovery specialist. I recover money, and if needed, personal property to liquidate for the settlement of torts. In short, I enforce the financial responsibility law for a small amount of insured people in the State of Texas. I am working to recover money for victims of uninsured motorists and criminals.
So how do you ensure the driver/vehicle is insured? I think I have come up with a solution, and a national one at that!
Charge $5.00 per gallon of gas. Half goes toward the petrol itself the other half toward insurance. That way you know every car on the road has paid for insurance. No gas, no insurance, no driving. This solves the problem of impounding vehicles, databases, insurance cards etc. etc. etc. Moreover, the amount of gas/insurance a person buys would be proportionate to the amount of driving they do, (which, by the way, is supposedly proportionate to their risk). If you want to save on gas/insurance buy a more fuel-efficient vehicle (now we are even helping the environment!).
My only concern however is with the way Y’all think. God forbid you run out of gas in Texas… they will shoot you!
Just thinking out-side the box.
Good thinking, but what about the stolen vehicle, or the excluded driver that has no license. How would we know which vehicle is getting gas? It\’s something to think about, but it couldn\’t be a catch all, you know.
I was thinking more along the lines of a national no-fault insurance pool. Everyone (buying gas) pays in, every vehicle has coverage. (Ohhhh…the insurance companies are not going to like that – and I work for one shhhhhhhh)
Who pays now if the car is driven by a thief? (hopefully the criminal will run out of gas before he hits anyone).
How about…scan your valid driver\’s license at the pump to get gas?
Hey, I didn\’t say it was perfect.
\”They\” came up with this idea in California. I guess they figured (since they have a 365 day legislature that needed something to do) that if you bought gas in CA, but ran out of gas in LA, you would run out of insurance.
One thing we DON\’T want is federal legislation of insurance…unless your name is Ted Kennedy.
Plus, in Texas, your trial lawyers wouln\’t have as much to chase ambulances for.