Food or insurance?
I am not saying people should drive without insurance
I have absolutely no sympathy for people driving without auto insurance. All you end up doing is making the rates even higher for those of us who DO carry the proper and required auto insurance! Uninsured drivers are one of the largest causes of high insurance rates, bar none.
If you can't afford to have insurance, you can't afford to drive. Period. I have a suggestion for those who say they can't get to and from work without a car: Take the bus, RTD is really quite good!
Aaron
Hear hear! If you can't obey the law, don't drive. Take that gas money and take the bus.
Posted by fiesty on March 30, 2007 06:45 AMThe number of uninsured drivers continues to grow each and every day because so many more people ignore the law and pass the cost on to us!
I was recently involved in an accident involving three people. One of the driver's left the scene (obviously he was uninsured) and the second one had what was later found to be a COUNTERFEIT insurance card. Yes, folks, for a mere pitance you can print yourself a fake insurance card.
When I reported to the Sheriff's Department that the driver had used a fake card they told me that they would do nothing to help me. That it was simply a CIVIL matter. The Sheriff's Department could easily find this individual (I know where he lives) and yet they do nothing. I am sure he is still driving with this fake insurance Because I drive an older vehicle I carried liability only. Big mistake.
And our law enforcement LOOKS THE OTHER WAY. Just incredible!!!!! Looks like more and more of our laws are being ignored every day. When do I get to decide which laws I want to live by?
Posted by Enforce the law!!! on March 30, 2007 10:03 AMAll comments take the opposite ground of the letter writer: Add me to the opposite ground. r22037yahoo
Posted by Richard Grimes on March 30, 2007 10:19 AMWe switched to a tort based insurance system at the same time we openly coddle illegals. Coincidence or connivance?
Posted by Bob on March 30, 2007 10:24 AMMs. Bettini claims auto insurance costs $100 per month. I beg to differ. I carry liability coverage on two vehicles with limits of $100,000 per person/$300,000 per accident and property damage liability of $50,000 per accident. I also carry uninsured motorist coverage. My total premium for a 1-year policy beginning in April is $527. That's about $43 a month and two vehicles are covered.
The bottom line is if you can afford a car, you can afford insurance. $106 of my annual premium is for uninsured motorist coverage. It's not fair that law-abiding drivers have to pay more because there are scofflaws who don't buy insurance. Insurance costs for all of us would go down if we didn't have to worry about uninsured drivers.
Posted by karen on March 30, 2007 10:38 AMI certainly don't have sympathy for all those who drive without insurance. I certainly do have sympathy for some, for example, a single mother who is working two jobs and needs a car to get around but is spending her money on food and shelter. There may not be any practical way to alleviate her plight, but I wish there were. Some people find it quite easy to not have any sympathy for the plight of others. I think that is unfortunate for the well-being of our country. We can't always help those in need, but if we continue to have sympathy for them and are thus open to ways to help them, perhaps a way will show up. If we simply write them off we "no sympathy from this dude", we shut ourselves off from possible solutions; if that be the case, we can hardly call ourselves a compassionate nation.
A bleeding heart liberal? You're damned right. If your heart doesn't bleed for those who life has dealt a bad hand, you need a transplant. The heart has always been a symbol of love and compassion, as in the sacred heart of Jesus. It's not enough to put hearts on Valentine cards.
Posted by Truth on March 30, 2007 11:07 AMHey, Truth, what Jesus have to do with the issue of driving without insurance?
Posted by Alex on March 30, 2007 11:54 AMHey, Truth, what does your belief in Jesus have to do with the issue of driving without insurance?
Posted by Alex on March 30, 2007 11:54 AMHow many remember when Colorado adopted the "no fault" racket; and we were PROMISED that our insurance premiums would go down? Huh?
Then, of course, just like Mass. where the "no fault" racket has been in place for ages, Colorado's premiums went up, out of sight. Because the companies could force the buyer to take all the unwanted extras - such as expensive collision and comprehensive at ridiculous premiums for equally ridiculous deductables - or just not write a policy at all.
Then, anyone who wanted simple liability, and the "no fault" mandated coverage, and who wouldn't - or didn't want to - pay for the extras wound up in the Assigned Risk Pool, where the insurance companies made up the difference with premiums that were even more outrageous than for their packages.
Well, folks kinda got tired of that rip-off; and decided to go back to the kind of insurance method whereby the BUYER got the benefits of competition - including rates for good drivers, etc., etc., which were totally meaningless under the "no-fault" packaging.
Did the insurance companies come around, and begin to charge for what the insured wanted, at reasonable premium? HA! HA! HA! We should live so long!
To the writer who has two vehicles covered for basics at something that does sound reasonable: Are you written through a Colorado Agent - with his commission being a huge part of the cost? Or are you taking advantage of on-line companies, such as GEICO, for instance; where it is possible to get basics at reasonable premiums?
If you're getting good coverage, and good service, tell the fellow who is scraping by with a "package deal" - such as paying collision and comprehensive premiums for a car with no "Book Value" at all - just to be able to afford minimums of liability.
Posted by Old Grouch on March 30, 2007 12:15 PMI don't advocate driving without insurance, at all. If you cause a wreck, you not only get yourself in bigtime trouble, you also can financially devastate the other person(s) whose car(s) you hit.
However, I would be appalled if they actually passed a law requiring cars to be siezed from uninsured owners. I was very strapped for cash for a few months and my insurance policy lapsed during that time period. I did NOT drive, not even one time. And when I got back on my feet, I re-activated my insurance policy. If my car had been siezed in that time period, it could have cost me my livelihood, then I never would have gotten my insurance active again.
At any rate, I think the whole insurance industry has gotten incredibly out of hand, and one that is basically holding all of us hostage. What with rate and premium hikes, the cost of maintaining insurance is getting harder and harder for many folks to cover.
To the person who has two cars on premium coverage for $43 a month - please tell the rest of us who your insurer is! And how did you get such a deal? You must have never gotten a single ticket in your life, lol.
Posted by mytwosense on March 30, 2007 12:40 PMThe problem is that our society is car based, like it or not...the gov't and powers that be build communities based on the assumption that everyone will be driving...then they order us to pay monthly fees for insurance ( a cost with no actual benefits unless you are in a crash )...it is not the fault of poor individuals that their community is set up for the use of cars, and it is not their fault that the gov't mandates they buy insurance if they want to use a car, ie if they want to utilize the infrastructure of their tax-paid community.
Truth
I think you misunderstand when people say "no sympathy from this dude". We all have sympathy for the single mom with 2 jobs. There are varying degrees of that sympathy between people but there is some sympathy from probably everyone. However, if she or anyone else gets behind the wheel of a car without proper liability insurance that sympathy goes away. She is now putting me and my family at great risk and I have no sympathy for someone to do that just because they are poor.
We all have tough times and tough decisions to make in our lives. Either make the right decision or pay the price if you ask me.
By the way, I'm poor. I make well below the "basic needs" wage for a family of four and yet there is always food on the table, a roof over our heads, tons of money in my retirement accounts, a strong safety net in the savings account and two cars that carry the insurance that is legally required. If you can't learn to budget that's not my fault.
Posted by Dleef23 on March 30, 2007 03:45 PMDleef23...
are you sure you know what 'poor' means...im pretty sure most 'poor' people do not have 'tons' of money in the bank...usually poor means you don't have tons of money...
Good for you Dleef23. Poor doesn't need to mean broke. With a number of exceptions (e.g., very old, very young, very ill), poor usually means addiction. And these are the people who need the insurance the most!
Posted by Bob on March 30, 2007 04:36 PMdio. lots of us are poor. i make 28,00 a year, and my family lives just fine. we dont have tv, or a phone, nor do we need it. essentials only. Car insurance is one of those essentials. Poor does not always mean suffering.
Posted by Rich M on March 30, 2007 05:01 PMAlex" "Hey, Truth, what Jesus have to do with the issue of driving without insurance?"
Not insurance, Alex, compassion for the underdog.
Posted by Truth on March 30, 2007 06:46 PMDieef23, I appreciate your comments about the poor, the uninsured and compassion. Actually, in my opinion, most people who drive without insurance do not put others at great risk any more than I do. As is the case with many people, I've driven for many years without an accident. That is also true of many, I think most, uninsured drivers. Many are likely to drive extra carefully just because they are uninsured.
I also recognize that many uninsured do not drive carefully and do indeed put others at great risk and that the uninsured are a big problem. I just prefer not to use hyperbole to describe the problem.
If the auto makers paid more attention to safety and repair costs and less to looks and speed, the problem would be a good deal less. And I do think the law should make some kind of accommodation for many who are scraping by and need to drive to support their families.
Tons of money in your retirement account and a strong safety net in a savings account? You don't get tons of money in a retirement account without getting a significant salary.
Posted by Truth on March 30, 2007 07:07 PMI know 2 people one gets $1,800 per month from SS diability though they can easily work.The other works on and off.They get food stamps,heating assistance free food from the food banks and have a brand new Grand Am. No insurance. They both smoke a carton of Marlboros per week at the minimum cost of $30 per carton x 2 per week = $ 60 per week on cigarettes.That's about $240.00 per month on cigarettes alone.These people are blood suckers off the tax payers.
They claim they can't afford insurance.
Posted by on April 2, 2007 07:54 AM