Posted on 03/05/2007 4:43:59 PM PST by OKIEDOC
Motorists who fail to show proof of liability insurance during a traffic stop could see their vehicles headed for the auction block under a bill passed Monday by the Oklahoma Senate.
Sen. Patrick Anderson, R-Enid, won adoption of an amendment to allow for the seizing of vehicles when drivers cannot show that they have insurance. His plan amends a section of law that now allows police to confiscate vehicles containing drugs.
Anderson's amendment was attached to a bill prohibiting inserting microchips into Oklahomans against their will. That measure was approved, 35-13, and sent to the House for consideration.
Some senators expressed concern that Anderson's bill could penalize motorists who misplace their liability insurance information by requiring them to pay for towing and storage charges.
Anderson said that problem could be solved by a law that goes into effect next year to provide for instantly determining if a motorist has liability insurance.
Anderson said he had been deluged with e-mails supporting the legislation from motorists who have suffered losses because they were involved in accidents with people who do not have insurance.
The Enid senator got behind the vehicle seizure plan after family members of his administrative assistant, Sandy Riley, were injured last year in an accident with an uninsured driver, who died in the wreck. Riley's family members have had at least $200,000 so far in medical expenses.
After acting on Anderson's amendment, senators voted 35-13 to send Crain's microchip bill to the House for consideration. The bill is in a form that it must return to the Senate for a second vote.
Crain said he came up with the idea for his bill
This is nuts.
I despise civil asset forfeiture laws, regardless of the purported societal benefits. It's a big, fat invitation to corruption of law enforcement.
Our local police did a roadblock to check for licenses Saturday night. They found 50 people driving with no license. They didn't say the total of cars stopped but they did the roadblock in the part of town that is full of illegals.
I was shocked that they even did it.
If a law is required to offset another law that hasn't even been voted on yet you know its a royal screwing of the public, the Constitution and the public trust.
Does the bill take into account people who simply lapsed for a day or two? I understand the need to make sure everybody is insured, but this can really hurt alot of people who live paycheck to paycheck and occasionally lapse.
Me too, and I agree that this is corruption and abuse just waiting to happen.
It'll make the insurance companies happy.
Uninsured rates in CA are still in the 30% range, even though, supposedly, you can't register a car without liability.
Nonetheless, confiscating property makes me plenty uncomfortable.
I have updated my FMCDH (From My Cold Dead Hands) sign-off with the addition of (BITS).....Blood In The Streets, which I foresee coming soon, due to the enormous increase of the Marxist progressive movement being shoved down the throat of this failing REPUBLIC through the Judicial tyranny of fiat law, the passing of unconstitutional laws by the Legislative and Executive branches of our government and the enormous tax burden placed upon the average American to support unconstitutional programs put forth by Marxist ideology. I do not advocate revolution. I only think of what I foresee.
FMCDH(BITS)
My wife was hit by another vehicle. She was cited because we had not placed the last insurance notice in the car glove compartment. She was not at fault in the accident.
If a "seizure" law had been in effect, things could have gotten ugly. Do you want your vehicle ownership to be at the whim of a government computer "talking" to your insurance company??!! If you do, you don't understand computers and interoperability.
Couple this with the move in many states to allow the department which performs the seizure to keep the funds, and you have a prescription for a big problem.
Civil forfeiture laws make me skittish. They're usually completely out of proportion to the offense committed (like forfeiting your car for patronizing a prostitute, as happens in some states). This *may* be a more appropriate use of the power as it's a vehicular offense, and the car shouldn't be on the road anyway without insurance.
Ideally, anybody who was caught driving a car while being an illegal alien would lose the car when they were deported, but I don't know if the mechanics really exist to make that work accurately yet.
}:-)4
they'll be exempt, I'm sure.maybe even given 'sanctuary' status.
More idiocy from the rulers.
I bet they get some FINE automobiles
I'll bet that it is the insurance companies who are really behind this.
I forgot to add that in Arizona if you lapse the state automatically knows it however if you reinstate your insurance you have to pay to reinstate your tags instead of the state automatically turning them back on.My sister lapsed and had to pay a fine because she didnt notify the state she had reinstated her insurance.
I disagree with confiscation. I don't understand why they don't just enact tougher fines.
Who do you think is really behind it? BTW, in Tennessee we are also required to carry uninsured motorist insurance.
Fines are already tough, into the thousands of dollars in some cases.
"I bet they get some FINE automobiles"
You can bet they'll get their hands on expiration notifications, and go after the highest value vehicles.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.