GT Fundraiser Sweepstakes! Over $25,000 in Prizes!
GT is once again holding a fundraiser sweepstakes. We have some truly outstanding prizes to offer, including a Tactical Rifles M-40 .308 rifle,
Two custom AR-15's, with Black Rain lowers, Addax Tactical uppers and some great optics, a custom AR with an AR-5.7 5.7mmX28mm upper and a Black Rain lower, two Scottsdale Gun Club Custom Glocks, 3 other NIB Glocks, two custom 10/22 rifles, a new Mini-14 Ranch rifle and much, much more.Click Here For More Information
Add this story to many others for "Why people with dependents must have life insurance."
Mr. Sandifer may have had a "Aw S*" moment, but he didn't have any pain, and he got out of this life without having to dig through a pile of misery.
His family must. Perhaps he was well-insured.
The driver of the pickup-truck, just like those of you who drive big trucks because you want to win those occasional collisions, won. His "man card" gets a six-pack cluster on it.
Why can't they take the keys away and have their vehicle towed, when they stop an unlicensed driver, rather than issuing them citations?
My friend got his suspended b/c he forgot to show proof of insurance and only paid the speeding side of a previous cite. When he was stopped again, the MN cop wouldn't even let him drive it 50 feet into a parking lot. Towed/impounded it instead. In MN, everyone I know that got nailed for that got towed, 0 arrested just for Driving w/a suspended that I know of though.
Red
__________________
Originally Posted by cjlandry
Stupid is supposed to be fatal, but we spend countless resources to protect idiots from being the cause of their own demise. Occasionally, a ray of sunshine comes through and stupid manages to do the job it was designed for.
My friend got his suspended b/c he forgot to show proof of insurance and only paid the speeding side of a previous cite. When he was stopped again, the MN cop wouldn't even let him drive it 50 feet into a parking lot. Towed/impounded it instead. In MN, everyone I know that got nailed for that got towed, 0 arrested just for Driving w/a suspended that I know of though.
Red
As it should be.
Hell, I can't imagine risking driving without a license or insurance. The only people I've ever known who do such things are people who have no sense of civil responsibility or concern for their fellow man.
This incident really makes me sick.
__________________
Lone Watie: Get ready, little lady. Hell is coming to breakfast.
Add this story to many others for "Why people with dependents must have life insurance."
Mr. Sandifer may have had a "Aw S*" moment, but he didn't have any pain, and he got out of this life without having to dig through a pile of misery.
His family must. Perhaps he was well-insured.
The driver of the pickup-truck, just like those of you who drive big trucks because you want to win those occasional collisions, won. His "man card" gets a six-pack cluster on it.
. Some prize he's got waiting for him. Yeah, I get in my truck as do many of the GTer's on this forum wondering if this will be my day to "win". Many of us probably drive full size trucks because they are necessary for our daily jobs. You go haul a bobcat with your Prius. Enjoy.
Hell, I can't imagine risking driving without a license or insurance. The only people I've ever known who do such things are people who have no sense of civil responsibility or concern for their fellow man.
This incident really makes me sick.
cj, I understand...and he (my friend) learned his lesson. It literally was suspended, and he got stopped before the letter telling him that reached him...He had been cited for speeding, and no proof of insurance, and paid the speeding part, forgetting to send in proof.
Red
__________________
Originally Posted by cjlandry
Stupid is supposed to be fatal, but we spend countless resources to protect idiots from being the cause of their own demise. Occasionally, a ray of sunshine comes through and stupid manages to do the job it was designed for.
Does anyone else have any thoughts or comments on whether or not folks who aren't licensed to drive vehicles should be given a piece of paper and allowed to drive on?
I'm pretty sure, but not positive, that if you are caught driving suspended you get locked up on the spot here in GA. I know you do at least some of the time because I know someone it's happened to- it's probably officer's discretion, like most everything else. And that's the way it should be imo.
. Some prize he's got waiting for him. Yeah, I get in my truck as do many of the GTer's on this forum wondering if this will be my day to "win". Many of us probably drive full size trucks because they are necessary for our daily jobs. You go haul a bobcat with your Prius. Enjoy.
I drive Ford Focus. I survived a rear-ending from an uninsured driver of a H2.
I've earned my attitude.
I would think that no license would automatically invalidate any insurance that may be attached to either the driver or the vehicle.
Am I wrong?
Not necessarily true. The vehicle could still have insurance and since the article didn't mention it, I'm guessing it did.
As we know, news storied are not always accurate so it's difficult to know the status of this violators license. Generally in my opinion....No license and you can't prove who they are=go to jail. Too easy for somebody with warrants to just say they don't have a license and give a fake name. Suspended for DWI or for refusing sobriety check=go to jail;there is a reason we don't want them driving. Renewal refused for failure to pay a surcharge-for things like no insurance or too many tickets, maybe other things=maybe just a citation if everything else is in order. There are other situations that others might want to jump in on. In my mind, it is about finding the right solution to the given circumstance and in this case, the info on the original stop is too deficient to say for sure. As I said earlier, everybody wishes the bad guy was off the street and the innocent citizen was still alive.
Not necessarily true. The vehicle could still have insurance and since the article didn't mention it, I'm guessing it did.
As we know, news storied are not always accurate so it's difficult to know the status of this violators license. Generally in my opinion....No license and you can't prove who they are=go to jail. Too easy for somebody with warrants to just say they don't have a license and give a fake name. Suspended for DWI or for refusing sobriety check=go to jail;there is a reason we don't want them driving. Renewal refused for failure to pay a surcharge-for things like no insurance or too many tickets, maybe other things=maybe just a citation if everything else is in order. There are other situations that others might want to jump in on. In my mind, it is about finding the right solution to the given circumstance and in this case, the info on the original stop is too deficient to say for sure. As I said earlier, everybody wishes the bad guy was off the street and the innocent citizen was still alive.
I'm with you.
I have insurance on my vehicles, but I hope that insurance covers me and mine if there's a problem, and that it doesn't allow an unlicensed driver, who's just been caught, to continue driving my vehicle.
I honestly don't think an unlicensed driver should be allowed, under any circumstances, to continue driving without a license.
__________________
Lone Watie: Get ready, little lady. Hell is coming to breakfast.
I would think that no license would automatically invalidate any insurance that may be attached to either the driver or the vehicle.
Am I wrong?
yeap , wrong. Insurance company would not have any record that your license was revoke after they write a policy.
Also in this sad case, I would hope his insurance was still valid, if not for the family and car and such. Even tho, the other person ( victim ) died.
Think about it, if a suspended driver runs into you, would you want his/her insurance to be still valid?
__________________
Those who are skilled in combat do not become angered, those who are skilled at winning do not become afraid. Thus the wise win before they fight, while the ignorant fight to win.
yeap , wrong. Insurance company would not have any record that your license was revoke after they write a policy.
Also in this sad case, I would hope his insurance was still valid, if not for the family and car and such. Even tho, the other person ( victim ) died.
Think about it, if a suspended driver runs into you, would you want his/her insurance to be still valid?
You're not following what I'm saying.
What I'm saying is that it's illegal for an unlicensed driver to operate my vehicle. If I allow it, then I'm liable for whatever they do. If I don't allow it, then I'm not liable, though my insurance company might be.
However, if that unlicensed driver is stopped, and I'm contacted because it's my vehicle, AND I then admit to allowing that person to use my vehicle, then I should be 100% liable for anything that happens afterward.
On the other hand, all insurance coverage should stop at the point where the unlicensed driver has been pulled over, the unlicensed driver should be removed from the vehicle, and the vehicle should be taken to impound to await recovery by the responsible party who owns that vehicle.
Besides, (feel free to prove me wrong here), I'm pretty sure that an insurance company covers their ass in such a situation where they don't know that your license has been revoked. If they don't cover their ass, they're retarded.
__________________
Lone Watie: Get ready, little lady. Hell is coming to breakfast.
In this day and age, you'd be an idiot to turn down that one.
UI & underinsured doesn't help you when you have property damage. I don't carry UI on either of my current vehicles, but cary comp/collision instead.
UI hasn't help me in any of the case where a driver was uninsured. I still had to fight in court or use my collision.
So I'm I a idiot?
__________________
Those who are skilled in combat do not become angered, those who are skilled at winning do not become afraid. Thus the wise win before they fight, while the ignorant fight to win.
What I'm saying is that it's illegal for an unlicensed driver to operate my vehicle. If I allow it, then I'm liable for whatever they do. If I don't allow it, then I'm not liable, though my insurance company might be.
However, if that unlicensed driver is stopped, and I'm contacted because it's my vehicle, AND I then admit to allowing that person to use my vehicle, then I should be 100% liable for anything that happens afterward.
On the other hand, all insurance coverage should stop at the point where the unlicensed driver has been pulled over, the unlicensed driver should be removed from the vehicle, and the vehicle should be taken to impound to await recovery by the responsible party who owns that vehicle.
Besides, (feel free to prove me wrong here), I'm pretty sure that an insurance company covers their ass in such a situation where they don't know that your license has been revoked. If they don't cover their ass, they're retarded.
I think when you apply for insurance the company assume and check that you have a driver license in the state your applying for. No check and balances to ensure you keep that license up.
I also doubt the state would notify the insurance company that you are no "revoked" nor would I trust that process if it exist.
In my state , my neighbor license was revoked with knowledge but yet his car was still insured and driven by other members of his family. His insurance wasn't automatically cutoff. Even tho I bet in the fine print of the policy , it would state something to the fact that you must "update your insurance company that your license is now not-valid"
I have to check my allstate policy ( a lot or reading btw )
__________________
Those who are skilled in combat do not become angered, those who are skilled at winning do not become afraid. Thus the wise win before they fight, while the ignorant fight to win.
I'm saying that insurance companies cover themselves thoroughly. So I'm fairly certain that their policies have statements covering their ass if the policy holder has his license revoked.
In other words, just because the company hasn't received notification that the policy-holder is no longer licensed to drive, doesn't mean that the policy holder is still insured after their license has been revoked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by noway
UI & underinsured doesn't help you when you have property damage. I don't carry UI on either of my current vehicles, but cary comp/collision instead.
UI hasn't help me in any of the case where a driver was uninsured. I still had to fight in court or use my collision.
So I'm I a idiot?
Possibly, but I'll presume innocence until proven guilty, and I'm not on the side of the prosecution.
__________________
Lone Watie: Get ready, little lady. Hell is coming to breakfast.
Why can't they take the keys away and have their vehicle towed, when they stop an unlicensed driver, rather than issuing them citations?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geezer Glide
He didn't have a valid license, 15 over, and he drives away and kills someone. Why was he allowed to drive away from the traffic stop?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wake_jumper
so, did he not have a valid driver's license because he is not a citizen of the U.S.? I'm sure we will never know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trifecta
If it was something simple like his license being expired, most of us would not want to see everyone arrested for every traffic offense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by faceplant
No liscense or insurance you should not be driving.
We have tried to pass laws around here to have cars towed if you do not have a license or insurance. Guess who fought that? And guess why? Sorry didn't mean to bash
Believe me... the police would love to lock up and tow the vehicles of those who continue to drive without a DL and insruance... but we are fought on it by everyone.
This initiative is in Denver, but even in DFWTX, when I was a patrolman there, we had to justify or articulate why we were arresting someone for NO DL/FMFR and towing their car. The admin and city attorney's office were chicken **** about it and wanted a summons issues and no tow.
__________________
"You aren't a real cop if you never listened to Art Bell on night shift." - blueiron
I'm saying that insurance companies cover themselves thoroughly. So I'm fairly certain that their policies have statements covering their ass if the policy holder has his license revoked.
In other words, just because the company hasn't received notification that the policy-holder is no longer licensed to drive, doesn't mean that the policy holder is still insured after their license has been revoked.
Possibly, but I'll presume innocence until proven guilty, and I'm not on the side of the prosecution.
But here's lays the problem, a license could be valid, expired, revoke or suspend which is neither expired or revoked. Just because your license is SUSPEND, means you can't DRIVE. It has nothing todo with insurance of the car or the tags or anything else.
People need to understand the numerous status of what suspended means and what it means to suspend a license,
Just like I could be suspend from school , but that doesn't make me a NON-student. I'm just suspended for a time or duration until I meet the requirements for reinstatement.
Also in my state and probably like this one in the story, people have license suspend for numerous release. So we have no valid knowledge as to why the driver in this thread was suspended. Maybe he didn't pay his child support or didn't take of a parking ticket or some other ticket, or settle the small court disposition, etc....
__________________
Those who are skilled in combat do not become angered, those who are skilled at winning do not become afraid. Thus the wise win before they fight, while the ignorant fight to win.
Believe me... the police would love to lock up and tow the vehicles of those who continue to drive without a DL and insruance... but we are fought on it by everyone.
This initiative is in Denver, but even in DFWTX, when I was a patrolman there, we had to justify or articulate why we were arresting someone for NO DL/FMFR and towing their car. The admin and city attorney's office were chicken **** about it and wanted a summons issues and no tow.
My comments from the above links;
The officer will have no choice but to impound the car and force the owner to pay an unreasonable amount (more than $2,700?!!) to get the car back
That's exactly what's going to happen and then the state is going to have a junky car ,worth less than the time and effort due to most people who let a car get "impounded" have junker to begin with and not worth anything to collect.
Only thing that will happen, the towing inc will get money , the state would have yet another feel good law on the book and think they will accomplish something good.
Know of any other silly laws that mimic the above ( we as gunowner should easily check that box off numerous times over )
__________________
Those who are skilled in combat do not become angered, those who are skilled at winning do not become afraid. Thus the wise win before they fight, while the ignorant fight to win.
TX LEO here. I hate how this one turned out. Really makes me wish that we were REQUIRED to tow and impound all vehicles that were found to be driven by a suspended diver, as they do in many states.
As it stands now, in Texas, it is only a Class C Misdemeanor (lowest level of offense) to drive with No DL/Suspended DL/Revoked DL/Expired DL. It becomes a Class B Misdemeanor only if the person has a previous CONVICTION (not just a ticket or arrest, but a conviction) on their record for Driving While License Invalid. OR, if the person doesn't have a previous conviction, but their license is currently suspended for a DWI-related offense.
Now...an officer can still arrest for the Class C offense, but most of the time, we will simply write a ticket for it, since it saves time and since that's what we typically do for all other Class C Misdemeanors. I however think that if we stop someone and write a ticket for DWLI, we should still be able to tow their car to prevent them from getting back behind the wheel 15 minutes later. As-is (at least at my department), some officers will at least require the suspended driver to call a licensed driver to the scene to drive their vehicle, but that seems futile to me, since the suspended driver is more than likely going to get right back behind the wheel a few blocks away.
Another possible complication in this whole mess is that oftentimes Traffic Division officers (and the officer who first stopped this guy was one) are in such a hurry to scratch out the ticket and move on to the next stop that they won't even run DLs. They'll just get the person's info, write out the ticket, and cut em loose. BAD practice, IMO, cause you let people with warrants and bad DLs slip through your fingers. And, depending on how your department's computer system works, you risk not having that subject's DL in the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system for officers in the future to pull up when they run the license plate of the car that was stopped. I know that at my department, the motors guys kind of go through phases of running DLs and not running DLs, but as I see it, only bad things can come from not running people.
Maybe after this incident, some group will lobby the Texas legislature to make it mandatory for LE to tow and impound the vehicles of people found to be driving on invalid DLs. THAT would be nice.
Why would you do that, other than to bolster a false belief?
Why are you trying so hard to make it seem everyone who may believe other than you do, is wrong? Does your ego, or beliefs really need that sort vindication to exist? What makes you so preoccupied with this sort of thing, that you must make a false statement to justify your beliefs and/or views?
Are you that hard up for conversation?
__________________
The elderly and disabled excluded, some people simply do not have the courage to provide for their own safety, yet they have no problem demanding others do it for them. They just don't have what it takes to overcome the fear that controls their life.
It must be horrible to live as a coward all one's life.
It happens when someone in the original post has an Hispanic name.
Seriously, I usually don't get wound up over such incidents, but when I saw that pickup pointed south in the north-bound lane, having just crested a hill, and the way that car was mangled, it struck a chord in my heart.
It was almost two days before the story appeared in the local media.
It has nothing to do with the guy's name, heritage, or anything else.
The lousy bastard was driving the wrong way on an Interstate access road, where people exit and are trimming highway speeds.
Witnesses said that he frequently drove the wrong way on that access road, apparently because it was inconvenient for him to drive 200 meters north and make the turnaround.
I hope no one drops me a note telling me of his whereabouts when he gets out on bond.
__________________
Lone Watie: Get ready, little lady. Hell is coming to breakfast.
Why would you do that, other than to bolster a false belief?
See above
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrys
Why are you trying so hard to make it seem everyone who may believe other than you do, is wrong?
I asked a question, cite where I espoused any sort of belief as well as what it was and whu 'everyone' is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrys
Does your ego, or beliefs really need that sort vindication to exist?
I asked a question, cite where I espoused any sort of belief as well as what it was.
Quote:
What makes you so preoccupied with this sort of thing, that you must make a false statement to justify your beliefs and/or views?
I asked one question, cite how this is a preoccupation.
Cite this false statement you speak of.
Cite where I espoused any sort of belief as well as what it was.
Quote:
Are you that hard up for conversation?
Will you have the ability to answer the above questions or simply envoke more ad hominem?
__________________ Better Living!
Through state control
Linear Mode
