Kansas Senators Ruth Teichman and Derek
Schmidt have proposed bills to deal with the number of uninsured drivers in their state.The first bill adds to current state law where first-time uninsured drivers pay fines and lose their license and vehicle’s license plates upon conviction. The new bill adds that, if the driver gets a third conviction and is uninsured, they would be charged for a felony and, if someone is killed by the auto accident, the uninsured driver is charged with murder instead of manslaughter.
The second bill would require all insurance companies to notify the state Department of Revenue when a policy holder cancels their coverage or changes policy. This will make it easier to identify drivers who have cancelled their policy and do not purchase a new one.
Information on current laws in the state can also be found in the article.
BREAKING: GM and Chrysler talking about merger
Spy Shots: Nissan 370Z again, with interior shots
2010 Mazda3 unveiled ahead of LA Auto Show
Spy Shots: Nissan 370Z caught undisguised
GM on Corvette ZR1 cancellation rumor: "Not true."
Knight Rider: The Liveblog -- Season 1, Episode 3
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Mazda RX-8 R3, return of the "hummer"
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Chevy Corvette Z06
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
Paris 2008: Le Day 1 Wrapup
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Fazzster @ Jan 25th 2006 11:38AM
The penalties should apply to the 1st time offender never mind the 3rd time...
Mister Webb @ Jan 25th 2006 11:47AM
^^ I second that.
Motttt @ Jan 25th 2006 11:55AM
I'm all for stiffening penaties for not having insance but what the hell does lack of insurance have to do with murder?
Brian @ Jan 25th 2006 11:56AM
Something amazes me regarding vehicles without insurance is the fact that police will allow a person to drive away from a scene or a traffic stop knowing they do not have insurance. Make them park the vehicle and call someone or walk. Put a boot on the vehicle until they provide proof of insurance.
poulsbo @ Jan 25th 2006 12:02PM
agreed with fazz. this is a fabulous bill and should be adopted across all states.
Ryan @ Jan 25th 2006 12:06PM
Well, the one thing I have learned about this story is you sure as hell better not get sideswiped in a sebring with a tahoe!!!!
Lee Gibson @ Jan 25th 2006 12:08PM
If the insurance companies were non-profit, I'd tend to agree a little bit more. However, since they can already use the police as their collection agency, I don't think there's any reason to further increase their power.
Ray @ Jan 25th 2006 12:09PM
Is this one of those laws Lou Dobbs has been talking about that is meant to be some kind of anti-illegal-immigration statute?
DKB_SATX @ Jan 25th 2006 12:27PM
I'm not quite sure I think the felony penalties should apply to the first-time offender, but I think fines should be stiff, and perhaps call it a felony the 2nd time. (If they didn't learn from the first 2, they're probably not going to learn until they cool their heels in jail a while.) As long as the state pursues fraudulent insurance company practices with the same zeal, this works fine.
When I went to grad school in New Orleans, Louisiana had the highest insurance premiums in the country and was one of the poorest states. Insurance companies had purchased the state insurance commissioner and had him set very high rates, so lots of people who couldn't afford the higher rates drove without insurance. The insurance companies then went back to the official in their pocket and said "Hey, with more uninsured motorists, the likelihood that we'll have to pay claims to the ones who DO have insurance is higher, so we want to charge them more" and things spiralled. It's important to have strict enforcement on BOTH sides of the insurance racket.
Wiess @ Jan 25th 2006 1:02PM
Its a Jeep Grand Cherokee
WillDaThrill @ Jan 25th 2006 1:09PM
They done good! Finally a real reason for some of these losers to get insurance. Everyone wants the big bad-ass cars but then finally realize that the insurance is as much as the car note......IT"S PART OF RESEARCHING THE VEHICLE YOU BUY!!!! Regardless of how much insurance rates are, you're an idiot if you buy what you can't afford. You have to start somewhere and that's usually from the bottom.
Back to the subject though, this would probably increase the hit and run rate. Don't know about Kansas, but it's a felony here in Nevada. We need this law because here in the southwest, a lot of our non-insured accidents are caused by illegal aliens. Not going to say what type, and I said a lot not all or most (for those of you who can add). This was the situation with every co-worker, subordinate, and friend who I have known since I have been here who had a car accident.
These are from my specific situations and are not factual statistics, just observations.
WillDaThrill @ Jan 25th 2006 1:12PM
I forgot to add that uninsured motorist are one of the big reasons our insurance is so high. Maybe once this is implemented nation wide, insurance rates will go down.
MikeW @ Jan 25th 2006 1:16PM
http://www.motorists.org/issues/insure/nma_insurance_position.html
http://www.motorists.org/issues/insure/named_owner.html
http://www.motorists.org/stealthis/coincidence.html
Deal with the problem, not the effects.
What a reactionary jerk.
HotRod @ Jan 25th 2006 1:31PM
Actually that is not a Tahoe. I thought so too at first, but then recognized the wheels from my current vehicle search. That is a Jeep Grand Cherokee. A 1999-2002 Laredo to be more specific.
So it seems to be some "Chrysler-on-Chrysler" action...
TrainDriver @ Jan 25th 2006 1:59PM
This stinks! All auto insurance should be voluntary not mandated by the state government. If you want to protect yourself and your property, use good judgement when operating your vehicle and either buy insurance of your choosing or invest enough dough to cover the damage you plan to do to someone else and those in your own vehicle.
Here's a novel thought: Perhaps if everyone were afraid that no one was insured, folks wouldn't be so apt to cut one another off in traffic or just roll on through stop signs. Yeah accidents happen, but there's always a reason: it sits in the driver's seat.
klaatu @ Jan 25th 2006 2:03PM
How's this for a constructive suggestion to solve the nationwide uninsured motorist problem?
Each state has an "insurance pool" of companies which must write insurance for very very poor drivers (and for whom appropriately high rates are applied).
Take this principle and add to it thusly; on every gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel purchased in any given state, place a certain amount of state "auto insurance tax" to cover the minimum legally required liabilty coverage and other minimum insurance requirements for that state. The monies would go to the state approved "pool" of insurance companies which would have to pay on all accidents within the state up to the minimum legal requirements.
Presuming that any given, licensed vehicle must be fuelled, this would mean that a vehicle licensed in, any given state would "carry" with it that state's minimum insurance wherever it was within the US or Canada.
Thus, uninsured motorists coverage would not be necessary. This would reduce overall insurance costs to the customers and reduce the court workloads, too.
Then, for the wiser people who wish to actually obtain more than the legally required minimum (to include comprehensive and collision, as would be required for vehicles on a lein), insurance agents or brokers in all states would be able to provide the necessary cover above and beyond the state minimums. Wise people would buy additional liability to protect their investments, just as they do now.
A tiny increase in the agent's commission from the usual 10% to 11% would compensate them for their "loss of premium" due to the basic auto insurance being paid for "at the pump". (Any plan which is to succeed must not cause anyone harm, whether financial or any other kind). Also, for collector vehicles, specific insurance would also still be available, as needed to properly protect such investments (agreed value policies, increased liability to protect one's assets, etc).
This method would also justly penalize people driving big (gas guzzling) vehicles because such vehicles can broadly be described as more dangerous to other vehicle users on the road as well as pedestrians.
Likewise this plan would not penalize people who drive less, as is now the case with insurance rates. After all, isn't the risk level commensurate with the amount of time on a road? And the more time you spend on the road, the more fuel you need, right? I would say yes.... as a common sense answer to both.
See? It's a win-win-win situation - except for (let's face the reality of it) the illegal aliens and people who otherwise cannot or will not save money to actually buy insurance (but often can be seen smoking, drinking, and buying pot with money which should have gone to buy legally required insurance or perhaps food for their children). Hey, I didn't invent this world, don't give me hell for telling it like it is.
I'm just GUESSING that a 25 cent per gallon tax would cover it as a national average, possibly (probably) higher on the coasts (like everything else, more expensive).
JIm @ Jan 25th 2006 2:04PM
Nationally, about 1 in 4 vehicles have no insurance. CA attempted to mandate insurance a number of years ago. Some folks in L.A. filed suit saying they were being punished because they lived in a "less than stellar" neighborhood. The propositioin was overturned in the courts (prob the 9th circuit - did I say that).
I support the following.
- If you are pulled over (or have an accident) for any reason and cannot prove you have insurance your vehicle is impounded "on the spot." If it is not claimed in 30 days it's auctioned. If there is a lien, let the debt holders work it out.
- Link the insurance companies, police, and loan holders by computer. If the owner CNX the insurance on a car with a lien, a flag goes up in the lien holders office (they'd probably want to know that their property was no longer insured). The flag would also go up with the police since insurance is required in most states for registration. A police task force would impound the vehicle immediately and the vehicle auctioned in 30 days, the monies obtained would finance the program and I could buy a cheap vehicle at auction.
Here is SoCal NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE would THINK of driving in Mexico without tourist insurance on their vehicle. It needs to be the other way around. The CHP tells me they cite Mexican drivers for infractions, they get back in their cars, drive back to Mexico, and are never heard from again. Do that in Mexico and don't pay...you'll be in jail until you do.
Anyway, that's how I feel about it. The ACLU would be all over it like a cheap suit though.
Roanoke @ Jan 25th 2006 3:50PM
To #16, You are an idiot. There is no way you'll get me to pay higher gas prices by further taxation of the petrol. I have a clean driving record and have "earned" a discount for my insurance. Although I don't like the gov't mandating anything with driving, this is one area where I can understand. I should not have to pay the same as the next guy because he can't drive (or is prone to more accidents). I've known too many who were involved in accidents with uninsured drives (sometime illegals) and 90% of the time, the outcome is terrible. You should be locked up a minimum of 10 days if you're caught w/o insurance.
Furthermore, I am sick and tired of sitting in traffic due to some moron who couldn't change lanes correctly and caused a wreck in the middle of the 5 lane interstate. It's all too common to sit for an extra 40 to 50 minutes due to this person's inability to drive. People who cause these types of accidents should loose their license FOREVER.
Ian @ Jan 25th 2006 3:58PM
How many illegal aliens are there in California = no driving license = no insurance
I was was in an accident (hit in the rear while stopped for traffic) in the State of Ct. The guy who caused the accident didn't have prope reistration for the car he drove and no no insurance. I telephoned the Police who wrote up the accident, to get some details for my insurance company and I asked what charges had been made against the driver. None they said and in answer to by emquiry they said "You think we have the time to go after every unisurance motorist?" Yes said I I thought thatw as your job? Nope they said with finality......
In other news. Read the terms of your own insurance and you will likely find that YOU are paying an extra fee to cover your insurance company if you are hit by such an uninsured motorist. So in essence uninsured motorists are mostly "insured" by us the insured motorists.
Ryan @ Jan 25th 2006 4:21PM
#14 & #10
-Well I'm a dumbass I really thought that was a Tahoe, well now it's obvious to me it is not. Thanks!