>pic unrelated I have a couple of questions. I don't

>>16560769
Not only this, but insurance isn’t even a government entity. Insurance companies are all private companies. How is it a 3rd party could be mandated to be given business when it isn't a government company? And why is it even necessary? Everyone knows the company doesn't actually protect you or your "property," which is a discrepancy in the contracts. Let’s ignore whether or not insurance is actually useful and just keep topic about why/how it happened.

How did this system come to be? How did it get to where it is today and why? This situation is like me starting a computer company, getting government mandates to force you to pay insurance for using your own computer, you paying me a monthly just for having it, even though you bought it, built it, repair it, and use it all on your own. And you don’t actually OWN it. Then, if something breaks, you are still responsible for the costs of repair AND I increase your monthly payments. You wouldn't accept this if it was your computer, how did this happen with the auto industry?

Just curious to know all the legalities behind this.

File: Racequeen2.jpg (196KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 800x1200px

>>16560769
>the cars you buy are not owned by you. They are your responsibility, yes. But they are the PROPERTY of the USA

I understand the gist of your viewpoint. You feel that if you don't pay registration or insurance that the car is taken from you or that you cannot use it. In that sense, you feel it is not really your property because someone else has powers over it.

But that is more false for cars than it is for your own home. In the USA, if you don't pay for the license, the car simply doesn't have a current license plate tab. If you don't renew your drivers license, you simply don't have a current license. It is not wrong for the gov't to require cars have license plates or for drivers to have a valid drivers license. Nor is it wrong to require insurance even though lots of people drive without insurance.

The government could easily check if cars have insurance or not by putting up robot camera scanners. They scan every plate and VIN and then check the database for valid insurance policies. But the gov't doesn't do that right now just like it doesn't have a true gun registry of every gun. The freedom activists have kept the gov't from doing that.

BUT for homes, your argument is valid in a metaphysical sense. Even though you own your home/property, if you don't pay taxes on it, it will be taken away from you (foreclosure) and sold without your permission. Now, that really doesn't feel like home or land ownership.

And the rich can do tricky things to take away your property. The CEO of Facebook Mark Zukurberg [SP] was suing many owners of nearby properties to his Hawaii estate and taking away the property rights after paying them for it of course. So people who might not want to sell are forced to because it costs too much money to defend themselves in court day after day month after month. The cost of defending your rights can cause you to lose simply to someone willing to play the attrition game when they have a loophole to file lawsuits

I bought a car and didn't have to register it or put insurance on it for 6 months. The key is that I didn't drive it.

The government doesn't own your car, the own the roads and infrastructure you drive it on.

Since you're operating it on the government's property, they want to make sure you and your vehicle will be less likely to damage their property, and if you do damage something on their property you'll be able to cover it.

>>16561336
This, you can own car, what you're paying is the privilege of driving on roads that were built by the country .

Now fuck off with this sovereign citizen bullshit and leave us alone.

>>16561336
One of the problems OP has is that he doesn't want to pay for insurance for his car.

>about why/how it happened.
Originally, car drivers were to put up a bond to show that they could take care of liability obligations when driving such a dangerous device. This escrow bond can still be done in my USA state (as with other states). However, it is not convenient and requires an up front lump sum escrow deposit.

The concept of bonding exists and continues to be used primarily for businesses that are bonded.

But for individual consumers, it is far more convenient and easier to purchase a bonding service from a company colloquially known as an "insurance company". Another advantage of purchasing this bonding from an insurance company, that company typically also provides the lawyers and research to handle related lawsuit cases. It also does the footwork and thus performs a "concierge" type service for their customers. So it's no wonder that buying insurance is by far the vastly preferred method as compared to the original method of putting up a bond.

But if you don't want to buy insurance, you can put up a bond. My state (and others) allow it. But it is quite inconvenient. And if lawsuits happen, you will have to hire your own lawyers and perform your own footwork and research and also show up in court and all those other things such as hire inspectors to validate car damages, liability damages, and more. Is that too much work for you? Then buy insurance and let them do all that. When you don't have insurance and do it all yourself thru a bond, you realize how much physical work the insurance company does for you besides just paying out the money. The insurance company also handles the court costs and documentation costs as part of your insurance fees.

>>16561375
>Now fuck off with this sovereign citizen bullshit and leave us alone.
Go back to /b/ with this childishness.

According to NV and CA state records (only two states I am aware of right now), the car is government property.

Input on the insurance question?

>>16561416
>One of the problems OP has is that he doesn't want to pay for insurance for his car.

No, that isn't it at all. I specifically stated this has nothing to do with me or my situation. It is just a question I've had for a while and the DMV nor the Police could give me any information on it.

>And if lawsuits happen, you will have to hire your own lawyers and perform your own footwork and research and also show up in court and all those other things such as hire inspectors to validate car damages, liability damages, and more. Is that too much work for you?

In the times I've had issues with people hitting me, I had to do this anyway. So I'm at a loss on this.

Thanks for the bonded information, though. I was always told by the DMV insurance is mandatory. First time I've heard of this bonding thing. Good info.