Well, they've been fined, and their license suspended, yet they still break the laws, so what's next? Maybe a taste of jail will give them the idea. I'm not that interested in the progression. I'm more interested that there be a progression of intensity for anti-social behavior. I'd want it to be clear to the criminal that the results are a practical response to anti-social behavior, and not an act of social vengeance.
OK, so you want the same basic system we have now. From what you said before I thought you were going for something more progressive (as in "new and different"). I thought you were advocating something different than throwing people in jail and the same old thing.
It doesn't start out that way. It only becomes more "strict" as one continues to ignore the laws.
Oh, well, that's not how you explained it. You explained it as making eating and pretty much everything but driving illegal. That's really strict.
No, it's not. Your insurance company should not be allowed to punish you for causing them to make a pay out.
Really? So, let's say you sign up with an insurance agency, paying them $100/month. 8 months later you get slammed by another car, totaling your own. You now need a new car and a rental for a week, and you were in the hospital for 3 days. Total, your insurance company paid out $33,000. So, now the company is out $32,200. But they can't try to recoupe that money at all?
Or does it seem like a better idea to have the other person's insurance pay for it, and then your insurance doesn't have to pay anything, and they have no reason to raise your rates?
Yeah, we call that assigning fault. But accidents happen all the time. And no one intended for them to happen. Accidents are not "fair".
Well, call it whatever you want. You can call it "flying purple" for all I care. It's purpose is still the same. Yes, accidents happen all the time and no one intended for them to happen most of the time. So?
But the lawyers and insurance companies make money by assigning blame and then making people pay them money.
No, the insurance companies make money by having people pay them premiums. People avoid having those premiums go up by having the blame rightly assigned to the other party.
You're still missing the point of "assigning blame". The point is to have the person responsible for the problem pay for it.
I think it's bit of a stretch to claim that other people are harmed by flying bodies.
:areyoucra
Think what you want, but I'll go with the facts that say that people not wearing their seatbelts put other people in extra danger. I'm sorry you want that not to be true, but ignoring it or refusing to look at the facts isn't going to make you any more correct.