New Database Will Expose Uninsured Drivers to Cops

If you give up freedom for safety then you shall have neither. Most people do not get the point. The system they are developing is to track vehicles. The problem with that is that it isn't vehicles that are insured it is people. I have insurance and it covers me in any car I drive. What if I drive a car owned by a person who didn't have insurance? Why should I be harrassed by the government revenue thugs? They can't do anything about it, but they can waste my time. My time is more important than their revenue collecting schemes. It will get to the point where we rebel against the theivery and take it out. 75% of the police in this country do nothing but right tickets all day. Most traffic laws are for making money. They really don't keep accidents from happening, because if they did we wouldn't need insurance. Accidents happen because people are stupid and don't pay attention. It usually has nothing to do with speeding or a turn signal. Most accidents attributed to different things like speeding usually go back to stupidity. If some flys off the road on a curve then it isn't speeding, it is the stupidity of the driver for not knowing how fast they could go. That goes back to not knowing how to drive. I can easily judge the road and situation to tell how fast I can go safely. It is normally much more than the speed limit (which is intentionally set really low to generate money).

Insurance does not prevent accidents!! Sheesh! Nor will any data base! It's a false sense of security that we are seeking with these data bases, government oversight, law enforcement, and basic invasion of privacy.

Why is uninsured/underinsured motorist insurance so inexpensive compared to regular insurance? It's because the vast majority of accidents are caused by those who are insured.

I have been in a few accidents and all of them have been with insured drivers or a poor uninsured deer. I am insured. Will the data base protect me from future deer? I'm pretty sure it won't, but my ability to be more aware of my surroundings probably will lower my chances of meeting another one. I know I'm being a bit flippant, but really, think about the data base. Seriously think about the ability of a data base of preventing an accident. In order for the data base to be truly effective, a camera would have to be on every corner of every street in every area of our country.

Personally, I'm tired of this B.S. F*** the speed cameras, f*** the insurance laws, and f*** many of the country's P.D.'s for being greedy-ass pigs.

Kudos to Clintorius!, Lisa, Dan, and Joe.

The people that voted yes to privacy are the ones driving without insurance.

As one of those people that has been hit from behind while sitting at a red light by an illegal, uninsured motorist I feel that these cameras would benefit society. I have been a driver for 30+ years and have carried insurance for most of those years, even before it was mandatory. Considering the track record of city, state and federal government agencies I don't have a lot of confidence that this system would work as well as claims made by proponents. I'm in Las Vegas Nevada and we get a lot of California drivers most of which have insurance but the one driver that hit me that didn't have insurance or legal residency in this country had California plates, and a California license (fake). I have to ask myself had this system been in place and working the way it's intended would this guy have been taken off the road before he caused several hundred dollars worth of damage to my vehicle... only time will tell.

One thing that brings up red flags is the fact that here in Las Vegas the bill to use this InsureNet system is backed by former Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins. He is now a lobbyist for InsureNet and sold lawmakers on the company’s proposal. I would prefer if there where companies competing for the area giving us a choice of companies.