Check out what I ran into. I'm consulting a friend that is running for congress and see what's her input.

It's about U.S. Constitution and right to travel

http://kriskemp.com/right-to-travel-...car-insurance/

Good reading

 

File this under paying taxes and other things are not "legal under the constitution" but you will def. get the ish end of the stick if you try fighting the system.

If you have the time and money to deal with getting cited, locked up and fined out the wazoo........more power to you.

 

 

Don't get me wrong I read the website. And the info was good to know but politics is big business and the citizens under its rule not paying doesn't fit in with that business model.

 

My thing is that, I don't want people who do not have driver's licenses and insurances hit my car. Unless they are willing to pay ALL the medical and vehicle damages cash without "ifs" and "buts."

I posted this for info for everyone and inputs not like I will do it or so. I just want to know inputs and some sort of discussion on this subject.

 

Its funny I work with a bunch anti-government guys in Raleigh and I JUST had this conversation with him.

Comprehensive/Collision are the 2 expensive parts of car insurance. He runs around with just liability. He doesn't even want to do that. Se we got into a discussion about.

I was asking him what happens if he ever hit anyone (accidents are called that for a reason). He stated that he pay out of pocket.

So then I proceeded to ask him if the person he hit doesn't want to fix their car a little at a time or on a payment plan and they have insurance then they have the right to go through their insurance company and get their car fixed. Then I asked him who he would need to pay.

He proceeded to say they person he hit. So when I pointed out that the insurance company had assumed the debt incurred so he would legally owe them. So when he made the statement that he wouldn't pay them and I proceeded to tell him they could garnish his wages, etc etc he didn't really ahve an answer for that.

I'm all for no insurance until you hit me. I want my car fixed. Not on consignment either. I've paid for full coverage for over 15 years and I have had only 2 at fault accidents. Both of them i got rear ended and ran into the person in front (the infamous following too closely). SO I technically have paid in way more then I needed to.

It makes me question if i really need comp/coll. I'd rather have it then not. Accidents do happen.

 

ummm, yeah lol

 

What Smurf said is exactly what ran through my mind when I saw the post. I barely read through the article and I already disagreed. The purpose of insurance is to protect yourself from being legally liable for someone else...this is why liability is the minimum in most states. I'd like to see the dummy in that article hit my car and have no insurance. Just like the whole income tax bit, it's another piece of stupidity.