At the point of a traffic stop and search, if there is "no moving violation" and no "accident" insurance is actually a mute point right? no harm no foul. I see the point of having insurance, I don't see the constitutionality of "requiring" it...after all that's just another form of "unfunded mandate"...like Obama-care.<quoted text>
That is a catch twenty-two, Ari, about the road checks. I don't have a problem with them road-checking if all they're going to do is see to it that people have a license to drive, and things that are needed on the vehicle that protect you and other drivers. I do have a problem with someone randomly asking to search my property. Although it's never happened to me, I still think without probable cause they have no right to random search. Getting them to understand this is another story.
The only reason I carry car insurance, full coverage, is to protect my interests. No insurance means if someone demolishes your property while you may simply be parked in a lot, and it's not covered with ins., you would still have to make the bank loan if there is any, or out of pocket, pay for another expensive vehicle. No one else is responsible for your destroyed car, or the repairs to fix it - unlike health insurance of which you take out to keep you from getting a constant bill from the doctor or hospital, and the ruination of your credit rating - among a host of other things.
Same with house insurance. If it burns to the ground and you have no ins., you're the only one out. No one has to pay for it and no one is responsible. You're just screwed and have to find a place to live and no one is forced to do anything for you.
The problem with this country is that those in charge want to do your thinking for you. Little by little we are losing the right to make our own decision and take on our own responsibility. They call that, Big Brother, and most conservatives do not like Big Brother's nose is all our affairs.
I bet you saw that coming, lol!