SwissChick... no worries. We're on the same page anyway! :)

No, I didn't miss that part of the post, but the first part read as though not everyone had insurance on "loaned" vehicles. Sorry, didn't mean to mess anything up. :)

SwissChick... I'm fully aware of bank requirements. You missed the other part of my post, that we also fully insured the very used yet safe vehicles our young drivers were using. Simply for the fact that they were inexperienced drivers. The added insurance was more for covering the idiotic decisions they might make when in the vehicle by themselves.
We had only one incident that we called on our insurance company for. We were fortunate.
So many kids with the youthful attitude that "I'm indestructible". We were all that way.

PT - I mentioned that in an earlier post.
.
gmaof3 - Having full coverage on a vehicle with a loan isn't really in the realm of this law. That issue, in itself, is the requirement by finance companies to have a vehicle fully insured until the last payment is made. They want to make sure their property is taken care of. This law effects vehicle insurance in general and the minimums that are required.

Sigma, are you suggesting that insurance actually indirectly causes accidents by allowing people to drive "care free" and "get away with anything?"

Don't most people understand that when you have at fault accidents your rates go up and if you have a bad enough driving record you'll likely be canceled?

Professor - See what a failure of an education system we have. useful info kids are not taught. Same with taxes.. none know how to do their taxes.... how pathetic.
-
As noted below, how would I irresponsibly cause an accident? Im not irresponsible. A couple years ago a car rear ended my friend, just bumped, but scraped the paint. My friend had no insurance, the other guy did. For some stupid reason this other guy thought he wasnt responsible because my friend didnt have insurance and he did. I think insurance gives some people a false sense of security and they think they have the ability to get away with anything and drive care free.

Professor, wow... THAT'S an eye-opener.

Dannow..
We heard from our insurance carrier. They will take the other driver to court to recoup the money spent to fix our car and our $500.00 deductible. However winning a small claims judgment does not guarantee payment. In cases such as this, I’m told that they may suspend the driving privileges of the offender until they monies are paid in full.. But as we all know, Those who will drive with no insurance would rarely stop driving because of not having a license as well....
The Days of personal accountability are but a distant memory….

I was the 'judge' at a 'reality' exercise at the Evansville High School recently. A number of seniors were given 'citations' as part of the exercise, and they had to come see me--as though they were going to court. I was astonished at this: I asked the students who got 'no insurance' citations why it was important to have insurance. Three of them--separately--told me that they thought insurance was for the purpose of being able to repair your car if it broke down! When I explained the REAL purpose, you could almost see the light-bulb come on. I wonder how prevalent that is?

Driving without proper insurance is blatent disregard for others well being. We should apply the same thought to those caught driving without insurance (blatent disregard for their well being and lock them up)

I have carried FULL coverage on all our vehicles that had loans and full coverage for our young drivers, till they came of age. After that, 3 out of 4 continued with coverage. The 4th just now, at 28 is covered by insurance. We have insurance on all of our "toys".
I had an accident that totaled my brand new car in 1993 before the first payment was due. My insurance company had a check in the mail just 5 days after.
Someone who is in financial dire straits can NOT afford NOT to have insurance. If you have nothing, BUT you drive a car, your responsibility to your community is to be financially covered.
I WILL see you in court and I WILL put you in prison if you cause an accident that you irresponsibly caused. Straight out, You think its your "right" to drive? Its MY right to be safe on our highways.

How many times have you heard folks say after an accident, '...and the other driver was uninsured...'.
Could it be that uninsured equals bad driver?
just sayin'.

frusion
Jun 21, 2011 at 10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal Ezoner... you forgot to list cigarettes, beer, and fancy nails
Don't forget monthly tanning dues!

Sigma- I believe the smarty that thinks no matter the weather conditions can still drive posted limits.

jaf2- here is one. LISTEN UP SIGMA!
Truck in front of me looses it trailer on center av. Cars in front and to the side of me and nothing but the river to both sides.
I had plenty of room in front of you like I said. We were going up hill. WHAT NOW braineack? If it hit me I have insurance to cover the damage! Trailer into the hood aof a car well let me tell you. I don't prefer to pay for it. Did he have insurance. Would it be his fault? Don't know but luckily the thing went onto the side walk and did a sopt because it was sideways. Good thing all in the area were awake. Could have been a mess. NO tmy fault. Could be the guys fault because he didn't hook up the chains like he shoudl have. Still if chains were hooked up it could have then jackknifed into the side of a car in the other lane. YOU NEED INSURANCE! Smarty pants.
Hope you never run into me. I will own a new house- or not cause you may be the uninsured w/o a pot ..etc.

The "times are tough and it's too expensive" argument is a load of crap. If you drive a car, you need to factor in insurance with all other costs that go along with driving (gas, maintenance, etc.)

If you can't afford to insure your vehicle, ride the bus until you can.

Sigma- I am just fine NOT having an accident in the last 24 years. But as I said I think I got some good payback.

Sigma40
Jun 21, 2011 at 10:31 a.m.
Suggest removal I think insurance is a waste of money. If you've never had an accident in the past 20 years and paid insurance for 20 years... think of all that cash you just threw away....literally gone and nothing to show for it....all for a sense of security. Shows how insecure people are.

You are such a piece of work. Yes that for me is $12,000. A car was stolen from me once. I dont have another 20K to just buy a new one because I was stupid and didn't carry insurance.
When YOU hurt somebody you have an extra $100k PL
US to pay for their medical bills??
When somebody vandalizers your car and you have o deductable it is fixed for free.

Is there a Driving School around here that teaches OFFENSIVE DRIVING? I'm an old guy who wants/needs to retrain and keep up with the modern driving vogue. Sadly, I have been driving defensively, within speed limits for too long(50+years). I also want to learn how to play Grand Theft Auto and learn how to wind through a maze of city streets at excessive speeds, somewhat like driving Milton Avenue on Thursday and Friday nights. I would like to return to being a youthful moron but I guess I can't, I'm just too old. Maybe that's why I got to be old!

Is there a Driving School around here that teaches OFFENSIVE DRIVING? I'm an old guy who wants/needs to retrain and keep up with the modern driving vogue. Sadly, I have been driving defensively, within speed limits for too long(50+years). I also want to learn how too play Grand Theft Auto and learn how to wind through a maze of city streets at excessive speeds, somewhat like driving Milton Avenue on Thursday and Friday nights. I would like to return to being a youthful moron but I guess I can't, I'm just too old. Maybe that's why I got to be old!

donnaw - Usually an insurance company will go after the uninsured (or insured) to recoup losses and they do include deductables and other costs.

WI Statutes
349.02
(2) (a) Notwithstanding sub. (1), a police officer, sheriff, deputy sheriff, traffic officer or motor vehicle inspector may not stop
or inspect a vehicle solely to determine compliance with a statute
or ordinance specified under par. (b) unless the police officer,
sheriff, deputy sheriff, traffic officer or motor vehicle inspector
has reasonable cause to believe that a violation of a statute or ordinance specified under par.

Are the police going to enforce this statute, or are officers going to pick and choose the laws they like?

Yes, I did say industry. I know it's a drop in the bucket but that wasn't my point. My point was that the insurance industry opposed the legislation. You don't spend any money opposing legislation you are in favor of. There is a perception in the public that the insurance industry promoted the legislation and I simply wanted to point out that wasn't the case.

"How in the world did we ever get by before mandatory insurance thank you local government and big insurance companies for thinking for me !"

One of the biggest misconceptions of the mandatory insurance legislation is that it was pushed through by the insurance industry. Actually the opposite is true. The insurance industry spent over a half million fighting it. However they were out spent by the trial attorney lobby which, if you feel it necessary, is the place to start pointing fingers.

PT..could you take that 16 year old kid to small claims court to get your $500 back. That just isn't fair to you.

Sigma, I agree with you. But in many places, 1 car length per 10 MPH means that 2 more cars and fit between you and the next car. And guaranteed that's what will happen. I have for years, and still do when practical follow the 2-second rule. But in rush-hour traffic one cannot even go BACKWARDS and leave 2 seconds (or 1 length per) Try that in Boston where they use the eye contact rule. If they know you see them and they have a bumper on you (yeah, that's FRONT bumper-side by side), they're coming over. Whether there's a gap or not. or Atlanta where they go racing by to get that edge between you and the car in front then have to jump on the brakes AS they're making the lane change.

Hell when I got hit as described in my last post I was following the 2-MINUTE rule. There was NOBODY in front of me until the other driver slid across.

Yeah, you can back off until your foot locks into the achilles stretch position, but that just means more room for more cars. Back off more and its more of the same. There does come a point when you just gotta throw em up and go with the flow. If you're always backing off then in some places that makes you the violator of impeding traffic law where it's keep up or pay up.

There is no reason to be bumper to bumper in any moving situation. If someone cuts in front of you, slow down and allow space. Construction zones, lane closures, there should be anough room ahead of you for him to get over.. I see people close the gap all the time being rude trying not to let the guy who waited till the last minute to get over. Of course if you're moving at 10mph and there is only 1 car length opening and they try to shoot in, you're only doing 10mph anyway and should have ample time to react. 20mph = 2 car lengths, 30mph = 3 car lengths... there is no excuse, if you know how to defensively drive you'll never hit anyone. Do people know what "Defensive driving" even is anymore?? I dont think so.

sigma i know that was a pretty dumb thing to write but here's stuff that happens everyday. Construction zone, lane closure. Idiot waits till the last possible minute to jump over. you weren't following anyone particularly closely and now you're right on his bumper.

This one happened to me. I'm alone in the right lane of a highway, with a couple cars in the left. First one decides to jump the brakes. Trailing car loses control & skids across right in front of me, the back of her car hitting the front of mine, sending me down an embankment. I was about to go barrel-rolling down the embankment, but decided to turn the wheel hard right and go down it on my terms. 3 TIMES the cop tried to write me up for following to close, using only the vehicle damage locations as her basis for judgement.
She had no insurance. Luckily I did.

Pretty soon we'll all have to wear helmets for driving..... do we need them? No. Would they help fatalities related to head trauma? Yes. Would it be one more thing the cops can give people tickets for not doing and make money? OH YEA! The money making scam of the law never ends.

jaf2 - 1 car length for every 10mph you are going. The only way you'd plow into someone is if you were dumb and not paying attention. Learn how to drive...If everyone practice defensive driving and actually knew how to drive, there would probably be 90% less accidents.

I carry insurance, but with scenarios like have been talked about here, most of the time, it is the person who HAS insurance that gets the shaft...so who are the dumb ones? Sounds to me like NOT carrying insurance has worked out for 90% of those who don't carry. So, why have the law? Revenue ding ding ding.

so you're travelling behind someone who, while it's just you & him on the highway, jumps on the brakes and you plow into him. You're automatically at fault for hitting him from behind. Now you're out way more than 20 years of insurance payments (potentially, depending on the value of the two cars combined and any injury -real or perceived- you may have caused).

Ezoner... you forgot to list cigarettes, beer, and fancy nails.

I think insurance is a waste of money. If you've never had an accident in the past 20 years and paid insurance for 20 years... think of all that cash you just threw away....literally gone and nothing to show for it....all for a sense of security. Shows how insecure people are.

Braunt -- then permanently park them or keep them off the roads. Take personal responsibility. Personally -- if you hit me, I would take you to court for everything you are worth.

What about people with 5-6 different vehicles? Theres no way I could or would want to insure all of mine at the same time. And though I do like to hop in them once in awhile and take one for a spin. I agree with that post about the journeyman electrician... 2 tickets a year is still cheaper than insurance. Stupid laws to protect the handicapped... thats what I think of this.

Let's be honest, auto insurance doesn't really cost all that much over the span of a year. You're operating a potentially deadly piece of machinery...no good reason not to have insurance.

Most of these people without insurance probably blow plenty money on cigs and alcohol, but somehow can't come up with money to pay their premiums. Give me a break.

It always shocks me when I hear people say that they cannot afford insurance, yet they carry the latest cell phone or iPhone and are constantly on the phone making calls. They have the largest flat screens on the planet and the laest iPods. They tend to have better cars than I do and then ......

Dont pay t heir rent, their heat , no insurance. They expect everyone else to pay......It that sense of entitlemnt that must change.

It always shocks me when I hear people say that they cannot afford insurance, yet they carry the latest cell phone or iPhone and are constantly on the phone making calls. They have the largest flat screens on the planet and the laest iPods. They tend to have better cars than I do and then ......

Dont pay t heir rent, their heat , no insurance. They expect everyone else to pay......It that sense of entitlemnt that must change.

They ought to follow the lead of other states. When insurance lapses or is cancelled, DMV goes to confiscate the license plates. Then we won't have to hear all the crying about "bogus" citations from those too irreverent to obey the laws. It is, after all much better to blame someone else for your own screwups, isn't it?

Frogger-I couldn't agree with you more about the UNDERinsured coverage. I upped mine last year after an accident in which I suffered a severe injury and the WI (at fault) driver's insurance barely covered medical costs. If you get nothing else from this, get as much UNDERinsured coverage as you can.

Driving carefully is all well and good, but they are called accidents for a reason. If we could all just drive really well and be extra careful to avoid them all of the time, there would be no need for insurance in the first place. It's just not realistic.

PT, I like your comment because although it's about driving without insurance, it also reflects on living without health care insurance as well. When somebody winds up in the hospital without insurance, we all pay as a society while letting the uninsured skate away. Leaving us to pay for their "Right" not to participate in a healthcare plan.

frogger, in all due respect to your comment, I'm referring to investigative reporting with wonky charts and all - breaking down each citation and stop into categories as I've mentioned. I believe it is those kind of reports that help the police and the community to understand what exactly is going on with those stops.

My Wife was just in an accident, caused by a 16 Yr Old Driver of two Months.. He of course with the full knowledge of his parents, Was Driving without any insurance. He was ticketed for failure to Yield and for no Insurance.. There was over a Grand worth of damage to our car, I do Carry full coverage as well as coverage for uninsured Motorists.
But it still cost us $500.00 out of pocket to cover our deductible as well as the loss of the vehicle use for 2 weeks. And I might add that I have been out of work for 13 Months and I still make it a priority to keep our vehicles insured. But can certainly not afford $500.00 every time someone else feels it’s there right to drive without insurance and essentially thumb there nose at the people that they have caused vehicle or personal injury to.. And just pay the ticket and skate away.. Leaving us to pay for there "Rights"????

For those who do carry insurance PLEASE be sure you have UNDERinsured and UNinsured. Don't be fooled by the new law that ALL must have insurance. As you can see by any days public record that is not the case!! Prtect yourslef from those people. I know it stinks but if it does happen you will feel better protected. Also have some good $ coverages on that as well.
I pay my premiums and hope to never have to use them. That seems easiest and less life interferring to me. Knock on wood. Or recyled material for those Green people !)

flyonthewall- he could have pulled you over for just the seatbelt! they can do that now.
Youshould wear it and be safe. I could go off on all the people that do live in an accident vs those who die with belt on but I wont. I also wont go into how you may need a belt to actully control that car in an emergency situation vs being flung around like a doll.
Drive safe.

If people can't afford insurance, then I can guarantee they cannot afford the damage they cause to another person or vehicle in an at fault accident. So is the solution they just shouldn't be responsible for it? They can just drive around with no insurance, causing accidents and damage with no liability until they're driving around with no license OR insurance causing accidents and damage with no liability? If you can't afford insurance, you can't afford to drive. That's the bottom line. Taking away their driver's licenses doesn't matter because they just drive without them! If you can't afford insurance, you can't afford to drive. Can't afford to drive? I hear the bus is cheap.
.
Thank you Frogger! You hit the nail on the head - 100% of nothing is still nothing. Don't break the law = don't get tickets = don't cost yourself money = don't have a bad driving record = can afford insurance. Here's a thought: if your driving record is so bad you can't afford insurance, that really proves the point that you are the kind of person that should absolutely be required to have it....and all of that is YOUR fault. I'm seriously beginning to think that jail is the best solution for some of these idiots...like the guy that was driving someone else's car with no license or insurance and 2 children in the car when he ran a stop sign and totaled my dad's car. Where is he now? Driving around in some other borrowed vehicle I'm sure. It cost my parents a fortune, but he walked away with a couple of measly tickets. Didn't even cost him $1000 to total a $16,000 vehicle. The reason insurance is expensive is because those of us that follow the law and have it also have to carry coverage for those idiot drivers that break the law driving around without it. I think if you get to cause thousands of dollars in damage to my property that I then have to claim on my insurance and pay my deductible to get it fixed and have my rates go up, then I should get to cause the same amount of damage to property you own and let it be your problem. There are some situations that and eye for an eye is really the way to go.

Soembody mentioned if the police would stop ticketing unlawful people then they could focus on other things . WELL if drivers stop driving like idiots we wouldn't need to be babysat by the police.

rock court court 19th.
19 entries
5 w/o insurance
2 no license
4 suspended
2- not carrying it.

Here are some questions.
If your license is suspended shouldn't you suspend your insurance(comp only -car is parked!)? Oh I forgot you are still driving.
Some said no license but didn't say no insurance? So you arry insurance but don't have a license??? How does the Insurance company feel about this??? OR you just got away with that one this time.

So over half of the court things have to do with licensing. So if people would drive better they wouldn't get pulled over in the first place. You cannot get pulled over for ot having insurance. How would they know to pull you over?
I guess they can pull you over for no reason but why would they. They seem busy enough for now.
So if you drive decent you wont get pulled over.

"youkillme
Jun 20, 2011 at 1:31 p.m.
Suggest removal whzbng, I don't want to read the daily court log. I want to know where these citations are taking place, what is the cause for the stop, what kind of car they were driving and the drivers and passengers ethnicity. Simple stuff for curious minds."

Read my last comment again. It is directly related. No DL, no passing of a DL test. NO drinving and obeying the laws of the road! Simple- then you get pulled over.

Could it be some haven't passed a driver ed test at all and don't know the laws of the road? How many stopped for no drivers license?
Maybe because they don't know the rules not becausse of their old car!!? They don't know the rules so they get pulled over.

"JPD targets.It is mostly older cars and a majority of low income people with no means to begin with. Some are lucky enough to have gas to look for work IF THEY CAN EVEN GET THAT. To"

It couldn't possible be they are the worst offenders could it???!!!

Sorry I don't buy it!!

"Homeowners or renters insurance would cover what you do on a bicycle."
No requirement for either of these."

If you have a mortgage there sure is!!
I you rent you better try to afford it somehow if you are smart. Loose everything and get it replaced or of course you are ENTITLED to new stuff because everybody else will give it to you. WHY go through all of that(emotionally) and NOT insure your stuff. $10 a month can get you some coverage. WHO cannot afford this. One less Big mac or 1 1/2 pack of smokes. find it someplace. It is important just like AUTO!

I agree if you cannot afford the ins you cannot afford the car. It it is a po$ and you don't care to cover it more than just lialbility it is NOT that much. If you cannot afford it because of your rotten driving record then you pay the price - don't drive until you can afford it again. Then ddrive right and sober.

Joy- in some states the car must pass inspections or it doesn't even go on the road! Be happy you don't have to pay for those. Also be glad you don't have to pay registration based on the value of your car here. Some of the people cannnot even pay their registration/plates. Ever see how many of those are in the public record??!!

carlos"as it is makes it hard for people to afford the cost and to ticket them is another hardship"

Again I will reiterate- don't drive like an idiot!! Then you wont get a ticket that would affect your rates.

The Janesville PD spends entirely too much time looking for opportunities to write tickets. It's actually really pathetic to see how excited some of their officers get when they "get you". If the Janesville PD has time to write all these tickets, they have too many officers on their payroll, or they are under too much pressure from the city to collect money from the public. Let them focus on real policework for a change and only write tickets when something really deserves it. I am sick of seeing police cars sitting in their "speed traps", spending hours every day doing nothing but waiting to get someone. There are so many other things they could be doing that would serve us all better.

What makes some of you think that of the 1200+ tickets JVL PD handed out, that they were "poor" people. My neighbor is a journeyman electrician (and I know how much they make as journeymen) and carries no insurance. Go figure. He told me that it's no big deal. Two tickets a year is still cheaper than 12 months of coverage. Here's a person who can definitely afford insurance.

whzbng, I don't want to read the daily court log. I want to know where these citations are taking place, what is the cause for the stop, what kind of car they were driving and the drivers and passengers ethnicity. Simple stuff for curious minds.

If you read the daily court log in the gazette you will see that a lot of the uninsured also drive after revocation, drive w/o a license,and drive with out proper registration. The police are busy trying to keep ahead of these dead weights. I have been hit twice by uninsured drivers. They all cost those that are insured higher premiums to cover their behavior.

If the Gazette had any cojones, they would investigate the cause, locations and profile of JPD's traffic stops of the 1,200 citations. Were they from the super-high traffic 14/26 retail sector or from within the city's neighborhoods?

I think driving is a right.. who is anyone else to say otherwise?

All this is about is money. Cops dont "serve and protect" anymore. They "enforce and fine".
This is one more thing the cops can generate revenue by. And also one more thing taxes can me collected on. $$$$$$$$$ is all its about.

The sad thing is that the costs are high and with the job market as it is makes it hard for people to afford the cost and to ticket them is another hardship.No matter what is done some just can't afford it. yes I agree it is a necessity, yet to make it a law and ticket as JPD does is insane as the people cannot afford the insurance let alone the fine. Watch the vehicles pulled over and you will see who the JPD targets.It is mostly older cars and a majority of low income people with no means to begin with. Some are lucky enough to have gas to look for work IF THEY CAN EVEN GET THAT. To those that comment if you can drive you can afford insurance WELL THAT IS NOT ACCURATE MANY MANY PEOPLE IN TODAYS WORLD ARE BARELY GETTING BY AND THAT IS SAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The jails will be filled soon for unpaid fines and the children will of those will be another burden for them to pay out for care. But to mandate everything that they can that will cost the people is the Wisconsin way anymore.

fisherhouse3 - finally, someone who gets straight to the point. Driving is a privilege, not a right, and either you do all the responsible things including driving safely, maintaining your vehicle properly, and carrying insurance, or you don't deserve the privilege. If you can't get insurance because of your horrible driving record, well, that speaks for itself.

"Homeowners or renters insurance would cover what you do on a bicycle."
No requirement for either of these.

If you can't afford health insurance - you can't afford to live. ;-O

If you can't afford insurance than you can't afford to drive a car.

According to the logic I've read expressed here, if someone opted out of the health care system, in other words, agreed not to utilize doctors or hospitals free of charge in the event they need them but are uninsured and have not means of paying, they could be exempt from the requirement to buy health insurance, just as someone who opts out of driving doesn't have to buy car insurance. I would go for that, but God help them if they get sick. Republicans: would this be an acceptable compromise, i.e. no requirement to buy health insurance if you sign an agreement stating that you will not and cannot have access to free health services (free-ridership) if you or your family need them and you can't afford to pay?

Homeowners or renters insurance would cover what you do on a bicycle.

What is that word again? Entitlement??!!

"How long before we require personal injury insurance in case we step on someone's toes or bump into them?"
I carry an unbrella for this. You never know what low life will sue you because they cannot walk,tripped on air and now think you owe them your home!! I did this because of loser parents letting kids run loose and don't give a rats butt where they are or what they are doing. I yelled at one of the lazy, fat women once. Didn't seem to help. She wouldn't even get ofof the couch to answer the door 6 feet away. She yelled "come in". Amazing.

Insurance is a racket to promote and protect consumerism, because that's what you are, a consumer. Not American, not human, not a living creature, but a consumer, a number on a balance sheet, a statistic in a powerpoint presentation on some insurance salesmen's risk analysis presentation in Poughkeepsie NY. $$$$$$$. Industries have to be protected, insurance is mandatory. Why don't bicyclists have to carry insurance?? Do Farmers have to license and insure their farm equipment to drive on public roads? How about sidewalks? How long before we require personal injury insurance in case we step on someone's toes or bump into them?

I think that Sigma's friends have a lot of fun with him.

rprp---" I agree but I believe anyone using a public road with any kind of transportation should be required to have insurance "
Would this include bicyclists using public roads?

If farmers have insurance on their farms they have liability coverage for damages they negligently cause by operating a tractor. Tractors are not subject to registration to operate on public roadways. That's why they don't have license plates and a individual policy covering them is not necessary.

frogger, you do not need proof of insurance to register a vehicle in Wisconsin. That wasn't included in the legislation. In fact if you get a ticket for failure to have insurance you don't even need to prove you have insurance to start driving again. Pay the fine and you're on your way. There are some people who's insurance cost would be so high that it might be "cost effective" to run the risk of being ticketed.

Anyone who would intentionally let another vehicle strike them and run the risk of injury, paralaysis or possibly death simply because they have insurance is a few bricks short of a full load.

Justaguy...I agree but I believe anyone using a public road with any kind of transportation should be required to have insurance and that is not the law today.

"reedrick
Jun 19, 2011 at 11:41 p.m.
Suggest removal ITS KIND OF STUPID TO MAKE SOMEBODY GET INSURANCE AS A LAW, LOOK THE BOTTOM LINE IS SOME PEOPLE JUST CANT AFFORD IT. ITS THAT SIMPLE. THEN YOU PULL THE PEOPLE OVER WHO CANT AFFORD IT AND YOU WRITE THEM MORE TICKETS THAT THEY CANT AFFORD. ITS THE AMERICAN WAY, PUT THEM INTO DEBT AND KEEP PUSHING THEM FURTHER DOWN"
WELL I guess if you don't drive like a butt head you wouldn't get pulled over. So I suggest if you cannot afford insurance don't drive so poorly, don't speed, register the car(oh you need proof of insurance now),wear your seatbelt, make sure the car is in legal working order,don't drive drunk. Shall I go on???

gma"Without Insurance, You WILL lose everything in court, if you cause an accident, with injuries."

Problem is they don't care and they don't have anything to lose anyway.100% of nothing is still nothing!!

Simply because an individual “chooses” to operate a vehicle on a roadway does not preclude that individual from ignoring basic social responsibility. There are all kinds of laws which inhibit an individual’s constitutional right for the betterment or safety of society (ie: shouting “fire” in a crowd). Allowing individuals to operate a machine which has the potential to cause personal injury or property damage without the need to provide some means of compensation for the injured party is irresponsible. That’s also why businesses are required, by law, to have Workman’s Comp. insurance. Knowing that the law requires minimal insurance coverage should be part of your “choice” as to whether you can afford to own a vehicle.

Yes, you can drive without insurance, but if you hit someone, you have to prove to the DOT you have the resources to pay for any and all associated costs or you may lose your license.

Insurance is a responsibility, but the first time you are hit by an uninsured or underinsured driver and are really hurt, you will be grateful to have it. Medical bills still have to be paid regardless of whether or not you or the other driver has adequate insurance.

"Why is it un-constitutional to require someone to carry health care coverage. But its not to require auto coverage."

Because you have a choice not to own a car and not to drive. Hence, you are not forced to buy car insurance

Why is it un-constitutional to require someone to carry health care coverage. But its not to require auto coverage. Please explain republicans

I don't really care for this law too much. Carrying insurance, to me, is just personal responsibility. But, there are people out there who can afford NOT to have insurance. What if they don't want to buy insurance? Do they have to prove that they can cover anything that may happen? Self-insured?

What does it matter to a burger flipper trying to make ends meet, I wonder, or the single mom, etcetera, who are struggling, who were once supported by the manufacturing jobs that are now absent in a town where all these tickets are being dolled out? If the insurance isn't easily affordable, will the tickets and levying of fines help? It's that important NOW all of a sudden? As if noone had any problems stemming from any accident and some kind of slap was needed? I dunno, I never saw any Public Service Announcements made dealing with the topic. I'll bet this ticket money isn't going to making PSA's!! ;) Just some things that came to mind. It's a fact that not everyone can afford food AND insurance.

Millions of drivers are breaking the law with no insurance because they don't know this about "Auto Insurance Clearance" you can find cheap insurance

billnewbie, unless you are willing to pay more taxes for extra officers at the jail you want those individuals on the bracelet. Otherwise you would be the first to complain about the extra cost.

You associate with some screwed up people Sigma. Either that or you take what they say way too literally.

Years ago I rode with someone that was almost in an accident. They said "if i had insurance I would have let them hit me.". I also know of several instances people let themselves get hit when they could have avoided it...to collect insurance money. Insurances main reason is to take the responsibility away from you if you hit someone. Big deal your premiums go up.. that is way better than forking over a $50k medical bill. Insurance = less worries. The main reason this bill was passed has nothing to do with what people think it does. Its generating tax money and forcing it.

That's an amazing statement Sigma40 in a backward sort of way, if I may be so crude as to describe it that way. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're basically saying any insurance creates individual irresponsibility because it socializes an individual's costs and losses on the backs of everyone who pays into the plan. If they had to pay for the losses directly themselves, they'd be more careful with their life choices and everyday responsibilities. I'm not arguing with you - just trying to clarify the premise behind your statement.

I think the law is bogus. All it does it enable carefree people to care even less about their bad driving.

+1 Bill

billnewbie... Good point! I agree.

Only 75 tickets issued by the Sheriff's dept. for not having insurance or proof of insurance when the city of Janeville issued 1210 of them???? I guess Sheriff Spoden doesn't think this law is worth the trouble to enforce it. Maybe he thinks his dept. is too busy early releasing and home confining criminals so they won't start over-crowding the county jail to make any real effort towards enforcing this law. Maybe someone should tell him that violating the insurance law has only a monetary penalty attached to it. Since these violators won't be crowding his jail, maybe he'll see fit to more vigorously enforce this new law and add the fines paid to county coffers. Or maybe not?

It's kind of refreshing to see a comment here at the Gazette critical of something other than Big Government, Obama or labor unions. How did you manage that rprp? - particularly on a mandatory insurance rule.

In November the law will revert to the old limits of 25000 per person, 50000 per accident and 10000 in property damage. 100/300 uninsured and underinsured motorists coverage will not be required and medical payments will revert back to the old limit of 1000. Insurance will still be mandatory.

Exactly. If you're operating ANYTHING motorized, it could possibly be involved in an accident. People who do not take the required financial safety precautions are living on borrowed time. Without Insurance, You WILL lose everything in court, if you cause an accident, with injuries.

rprp: What is your point? Wait till you get hit by an uninsured driver "hoping this doesn't happen" and you'll understand why this is a good law.

Does farmers have to have insurance when they run tractors on public roads? If not, then why are they allowed to use roads they don't contribute any money for building or maintaining.