Calif. Considers Ballot Measure to Crack Down on Uninsured Motorists

November 12, 2007

  • November 14, 2007 at 12:03 pm
    Gill Fin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Thats what they say in Seattle. If you impound that uninsured and unlicensed car with the unlicensed driver you are discriminating against the poor.

  • November 14, 2007 at 12:03 pm
    Gill Fin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Thats what they say in Seattle. If you impound that uninsured and unlicensed car with the unlicensed driver you are discriminating against the poor.

  • November 14, 2007 at 12:58 pm
    Einstein says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The question is does this solve the problem or compound it.

  • November 14, 2007 at 2:17 am
    gill fin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I think removal of the uninsured cars solves the problem.

  • November 14, 2007 at 4:35 am
    Mary B. says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Gil – you are kidding right? People are actually trying to make this into a “poor people” issue? Sounds to me like Peter crying wolf. Any uninsured person should have their car taken away and auctioned off and that uninsured person serve a mandatory minimum of 90 days in jail. Thank gawd for prop 213 in CA, at least the drunks, uninusred and felons can’t profit from an accident.

  • November 15, 2007 at 10:17 am
    Gill Fin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I wish I was kidding. When the subject of uninsured motorists comes up in licensing or continuing education classes, the number they throw around is between 30% to 50% of the cars on our extremely crowded and poorly planned roads are uninsured. Our former socialist insurance commissioner, Debra Senn, said back in the mid 90’s ‘its my job to enact the law, someone else’s job to enforce it’. I will give her credit for setting up a department to help holocaust survivors with reparations. Stupid me – I just didn’t realize what a huge problem that is. I just emailed, yesterday, two state legislators and one state senator and am looking forward to their very predictable response – either no response or the same tired idea. Enforcing the mandatory insurance law unfairly discriminates against the poor. I am starting to think that prosecuting someone for a crime might also be discriminating against the poor. At least here on the loony left coast.

  • November 15, 2007 at 11:10 am
    lastbat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Last I checked the poor aren’t a protected class. They’re like smokers – discriminate away. It may not be their choice to be poor, but they know the law just as well as middle- and upper-class America. I grew up in a broke household and we never went without car insurance. Ate a lot of government cheese, but had insurance.

    As much as I empathize with people who have no money, they are not a good enough reason to not enforce the law.

  • November 15, 2007 at 2:32 am
    Gill Fin says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Lastbat – don’t try saying that around here. The pacifists here would beat you to death, after tar and feathering you.
    Remember, this city re-elects Jim McDermott term with 88% of the vote. You remember Baghdad Jim McDermott? He Sean Penned it and went to Iraq during the runup to the war. Imagine being an Iraqi and having that slob show up? Talk about confusing. He is the one who got caught with an illegal audio tape of Newt Gingrich some people in Florida recorded. I believe he chaired the ethics committee when he got busted, convicted and slapped with a $600K fine.
    Like most fanatical liberals, he is off course and just the kind of quirky malcontent that passes for an intellectual in our ‘sanctuary city for illegal aliens’. Move inland, pray for earthquake.

  • November 15, 2007 at 4:59 am
    caveat emptor says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    When I lived in NY, not only did they take your plates, they came and towed the whole car. You could have it back after 90 days IF you showed a six month insurance policy paid in full, paid for the tow and paid for the 90 days of impound. Not only that but since insurance companies had to report cancellations to the state, you NEVER got away with it. As soon as they got that notice, you got a notice saying show insurance within 15 days or your car is subject to impound. Back then, there wasn’t much of an uninsured problem – don’t know if they still do it now.

  • November 20, 2007 at 9:28 am
    braveheart says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    PA tried it many years ago. They proposed paying a constable for every plate they removed. The Constables Association laughed at them… let’s see… risk my life for $25 by going into questionable neighborhoods and lifting plates or towing vehicles?? The response was a new business. Enterprising people would WELD the plate to the bumper for $10.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*