hmmm, not sure how this would work exactly since in my state insurance covers the driver as well. So I can have non-owners insurance and drive someones car that doesnt and I would be covered.
@Digitallysick: It's just dialing numbers going down lists. I know this because (ex.) my husband's cell is 555-555-5532 and mine is 555-555-5534. His phone rings and then about a minute later, mine does. Same number calling.
@DvBoard: Ditto. They call my husbands phone, then mine (we're two numbers off from each other) then his then mine. I got two calls in a matter of 20 minutes.
That makes me happy. I'm a verizon customer and have had those bastards call me on more than one occasion. Each time saying it's my last chance at a new warranty.
Guess where they can stick it? I'm a fan of mandatory insurance, but I'd rather it not be required (as here in NH) than be enforced by traffic cameras. This seems like "guilty until proven innocent" to me - why should I have to go to court to fight a computer's fuckup? At least a live cop will hear you out if you're polite (as you always should be).
I'm not advocating that anyone go shoot these out, but it would be pretty cool if they just ended up with holes in 'em.
Isn't it enough to have your insurance information handy when you actually need to present it? Nice idea, but having so much technology do so many things strikes me as being overly complicated, and may present more problems than they solve. All we need are failed scans that end up with false citations for not driving without insurance.
Notice they are not putting in place any new laws. They are just devising a way to enforce the law by observing public places. It was already illegal, and has been for some time. You just might actually get in trouble for it now. Either you agree that people must be ensured or not. If you don't, fight the law, not the enforcement of it. If you do, how can you have a problem with enforcement fo the law?
08/01/09
04/28/09
04/28/09
04/28/09
And, yes, AT&T please follow suit. ;)
04/28/09
04/28/09
04/28/09
04/29/09
...cause she is from Law And Order...
04/28/09
04/28/09
04/28/09
04/28/09
03/18/09
I'm not advocating that anyone go shoot these out, but it would be pretty cool if they just ended up with holes in 'em.
03/18/09
03/18/09
03/18/09
Sorry, screwed that up.
03/18/09
Notice they are not putting in place any new laws. They are just devising a way to enforce the law by observing public places. It was already illegal, and has been for some time. You just might actually get in trouble for it now. Either you agree that people must be ensured or not. If you don't, fight the law, not the enforcement of it. If you do, how can you have a problem with enforcement fo the law?
03/18/09
I can support the law and contest the punishment - taking money from people isn't conducive to them being able to afford things like insurance.
So which is it, do you want all motorists insured (full compliance) or do you want all motorists scrutinized and fined (full enforcement)?
If everyone got caught for every law they broke, the vast majority of our population would be in jail or in debt to the government for life.
03/18/09
I think thats the long term goal.
03/18/09
sure seems that way.
03/18/09
03/18/09
so ok, lets say you have insurance, you get your plates, and then you cancel the insurance. Do they send someone around to take your plates back??
03/18/09
03/18/09
they do that here 'cept they just won't give you a registration sticker, which will get you pulled over.