A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scotts figures:
=============
Voluntary insurance is fine. Compulsory insurance is not, including
compulsory "liability" insurance we have to carry on our vehicles.
==============

WRONG!

I need to know that when you put me out of action through an automobile
accident, that you'll have enough insurance to cover my loss of income
and sundry other expenses.

Why do you "need" to know this? What makes you believe that you have some
inherent right to know this, or to demand that I have anything at all by way
of insurance? Can you state any principle in the Constitution that gives you
this "right" to demand such things of me? I think not.

Your paranoia about being harmed by another driver is insufficient reason to
impose an economic burden on me.

The point is that if YOU are concerned about being "out of action" due to an
automobile accident, then YOU should buy insurance against that risk, not
compel ME to cover you in the incredibly unlikely event that we two should
have a traffic accident together.

Such insurance MUST be compulsory.

Why? You're perfectly free to obtain insurance against such risks if you
believe you need it. If I don't believe my chances of being harmed in an
automobile accident are significant, then I don¹t have to buy insurance. If
I come to find that I was wrong, then that¹s my lookout, and I stand to lose
everything either from tending to my own damages or as the result of a
lawsuit brought by someone I harmed. That's my choice to make as a free
citizen of this country.

I wouldn't think of imposing the burden upon YOU of insuring ME against YOUR
potential bad acts, much less the entire driving public. What is your
justification for imposing such a burden on me, or anyone else?

You are free to sue me if I do you harm should you decide not to buy
accidental damage and injury insurance. That's the way it should be.

Why "MUST" such insurance be compulsory?

If you
don't like it, don't drive

I don't like it, and I do drive. I also argue and lobby for changes to the
motor vehicle laws so that such ridiculous burdens are put where they
belong--on the individual who is at risk. In Florida, you don¹t have to have
"liability" insurance at all, or so I hear. If you think you're at risk from
other drivers, you buy insurance to cover YOUR potential loss, in an amount
suited to YOUR assets and needs. It works just fine there, and should be
universal.

-- it's a fee you pay to be able to get on
the road.

Then why is it not a "fee?" Why do I have to contract with a private company
and pay them for a full year's coverage, 24/7, that I don't need, as opposed
to having this "fee" assessed by the government, which would then provide
the insurance itself. This model is called "pay at the pump" and is based on
an additional tax on motor fuel to fund a government-run compensation
program for those injured by uninsured drivers. Even that system is fairer
than the present one, because as it is, I have to pay for a full year's
insurance even if I only drive some of my numerous vehicle as little as
twice a year. At present, I pay an outrageous amount for liability insurance
on my trash truck, which I use about 5 or 6 times a year to haul household
garbage and trash from my farm to the waste transfer station three miles
away. How is it fair that I have to pay for 365 days of coverage for YOUR
benefit, not mine, for six uses and 18 miles a year? I ought to be able to
pay for six days of coverage, or pay for whatever use I make of the truck on
the public highways as a function of how much gasoline I use in it.

And since we're on the issue of compulsory insurance, under what precept in
law am I lawfully required to "show my papers" (insurance identification
card) to any cop who asks, under penalty of criminal action if I refuse?
What ever happened to the Fourth Amendment? That policy is a private
contract between me and my insurance agent, and the police need both
probable cause and a warrant to demand it of me, as the Fourth Amendment
protects me from unreasonable searches and seizures of my "papers." This is
an interesting fact you might want to cogitate upon. I have refused to show
my insurance card to a cop for many years now because the law in Colorado
does not actually require one to do so, and even to the extent it actually
does, the law is unconstitutional under the SCOTUS precedent in Kolender v
Lawson.

I got a ticket for failing to show "immediate evidence of insurance" a while
back, after a deer committed suicide by running into the side of my truck.
The State Trooper had to fill out an accident report and demanded my "proof
of insurance." I referred him to the statement on the back of the
registration, which is an oath signed under penalty of perjury, that I had a
policy that complied with the law. He wouldn't accept that as "immediate
evidence of insurance," which is ALL the law requires me to provide in the
field. I refused to give him any other information, exercising my right to
remain silent, and he gave me a ticket. I demanded a jury trial, since
driving without insurance is a misdemeanor criminal offense. When my lawyer
went to the pre-trial hearing and explained my constitutional
search-and-seizure objections to both the law and the manner in which it was
being enforced, she said "What if I don¹t have time to play constitutional
games?" Excuse me? "Constitutional games?" Good thing I wasn't at the
meeting, because I would have ripped her a new asshole for characterizing my
defense of my fundamental Constitutional rights as a "game."

When she found out I wouldn't roll over, and that I had an air-tight,
Supreme Court-ratified argument that the law as written and as applied is
unconstitutional, she dismissed the ticket. I don¹t expect to ever show that
particular "private paper" to any cop, ever, and I'm looking forward to
getting more tickets for refusing to do so, in hopes of actually getting to
trial, where I can have the statute overturned by the courts, thus freeing
all Coloradoans from the tyranny of the police and a little, often outdated
piece of meaningless paper. They made it a pain in my ass, so now I'm going
to make it a pain in their ass. I'm betting I'm better at it than they are.
So far I'm right.

Sorry, but whether I carry insurance is none of your, or especially the
government's business, and you can both go pound sand. If you don't like it,
then don't drive.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser