Teckno LEO's

[PMitchell]

Wonder if this can capture a bike plate as well? :eek:


Super Cops or Big Brother? (http://www.baitcar.com/sites/baitcar-com.bryght.net/files/alpr.wmv)

[andy]

am sure it does work with bike plates just as good. AND I think it a good thing! If they find vehicles much faster they will find a lot of crooks much faster.

[messenger13]

I think this is the next step before plates are BlueTooth enabled, or a like technology. The LEOs (or their cameras) will no longer rely on line-of-sight...just be within range. Now that's Big Brother.

I guess it's "good". At least until I'm directly affected. ;)

[ahpd1992]

That is BIG BROTHER technology, I know its inevitable this stuff comes our way I am not a fan of it. I guess I am old school in the game of cops n robbers I still would rather have a human making the decisions. This type of surveillance is ripe for abuses. As an example one of out neighboring towns has has GPS car locators for years. It was sold as a safety item to locate downed officer's. Well guess what there has never been a missing officer located from this technology, but plenty of officers have been disciplined for being in one spot too long. It took their union and a court injunction to stop management from spying on them. If we will do this to each other how long do you think it will take to abuse it on the public.

"NO SIR, I DONT LIKE IT"

Tom

[johnrehder]

Anything that gives the police an edge in cathcing the bads guys is great. I am clean so I could care lees who takes a picture of my license plate, face or whatever! If you are not guilty of anything then why worry about it?

That is BIG BROTHER technology, I know its inevitable this stuff comes our way I am not a fan of it. I guess I am old school in the game of cops n robbers I still would rather have a human making the decisions. This type of surveillance is ripe for abuses. As an example one of out neighboring towns has has GPS car locators for years. It was sold as a safety item to locate downed officer's. Well guess what there has never been a missing officer located from this technology, but plenty of officers have been disciplined for being in one spot too long. It took their union and a court injunction to stop management from spying on them. If we will do this to each other how long do you think it will take to abuse it on the public.

"NO SIR, I DONT LIKE IT"

Tom

[dshealey]

That is BIG BROTHER technology, ---------------------------------------

"NO SIR, I DONT LIKE IT"

Tom

Well, I love it! I would REALLY love CA to use it to get uninsured drivers off the road, along with cars that are not legally registered, or stolen.

My feeling is that the people who hate things like this the most may bear watching. ;)

[messenger13]

David, John...
The guy you're picking on only happens to be a 15-year motorcop. Thanks for the chuckle. :)

[dpaz]

As a 16 year LEO I do like this but as a tool not as a decision maker as Tom mentioned. Humans should still make the decisions. Could it cause abuses? Yes, it could as can anything that is used by us. Good policies and strict adherence to them could make this a valuable tool. Just my 2 cents...

[Ridesalot]

CLICK IT OR TICKET !!!!!!

must not apply to the BIG BRO BOYS

[Chipper]

Its been used here in by the CHP in Sacramento for about one year.... YOu have to remember that it is only hitting on plates that are either stolen or unlicensed, or expired registration/insurance....

[jayjacobson]

Wonder if this can capture a bike plate as well?
Super Cops or Big Brother?
Yes, it works on all plates regardless of size.

Super cops or big brother? Both!

[hschisler]

... I am clean so I could care lees who takes a picture of my license plate, face or whatever! If you are not guilty of anything then why worry about it?There can be no doubt that this is a very, very efficient way of scanning lots of license plates and finding the stolen vehicles, vehicles used in crimes, etc.

But I don't like it. This is a slippery slope we are on, and we better get off it before we can't. Unfortunately, once we go down these routes there is rarely any turning back.

I am clean, too, but I don't think that gives government the right to scan me, watch me, surveil me, track me, etc. (Yes, I know: the legal eagles out there will tell me I'm wrong -- government does have the right, etc. I just don't have to like it.)

Yeah, this is one of my hot buttons, and I've been consistent on this topic. Another example is red-light cameras and speeding cameras. I'd rather pay more taxes to put a police officer at every corner than to have a machine catch me violating a traffic law.

Why don't we fast-forward 50 years and just implant a transponder in every baby at birth? That way we could monitor their vital signs... "for their protection"; their location... "to ensure they aren't somewhere they aren't supposed to be", and how long they have been there... "for our protection". This would make the jobs of parents, truant officers, police officers, probation officers, hospitals, civil engineers, and traffic planners so much easier and more efficient. :rolleyes:

Bottom line, for me: There will be replies that say "Howard, quit being a paranoid nutjob. This is all for our protection." Others have made the point much more simply and clearly than I can; maybe they will chime in. I seem to be in the minority on this one, and that's OK.

[hschisler]

...My feeling is that the people who hate things like this the most may bear watching. ;)I would expect the bad guys to hate this system, for the obvious reasons.

But there are some good guys out there who don't like it, either. I guess you better put me on this watch list.

[grifscoots]

I am clean, too, but I don't think that gives government the right to scan me, watch me, surveil me, track me, etc. (Yes, I know: the legal eagles out there will tell me I'm wrong -- government does have the right, etc. I just don't have to like it.)


And what gives the government right? Is it the fact that the professional politician's have turned the Constitution into a piece of toilet paper?

[kevincook]

I don't have any problem with the system checking my license plate against the list of people the cops are looking for. I would have a huge problem if they recorded the data on who they saw, where they saw them, etc.

Find the bad guys and discard all other data immediately! Anyone caught saving data or ordering data to be saved should have a mandatory 50 year prison sentence.

Maybe we should have a new constitutional ammendment dictating who can save ANY data about us, what they can save and for how long. We definitely need more protection from prying eyes but the cops are the least of our worries.

Should google be able to save every search you ever did? Should the cell phone companies keep track of which cell site you drove by? Should the credit reporting agencies collect any data about you without your permission, and sell it to whoever they feel like? The list goes on and on. :(

Kevin

[grahamw]

Interesting info - for more info google for SPECS cameras and GATSO. There are 4 ANPR teams in London and they are making over 200 arrests per month and in one recent operation in one London borough they siezed over 1,500 vechiles in 4 weeks and made many arrests. In the period street crime fell by 40 per cent as the criminals were denied the use of their transport. A very effective tool but the accountants will soon discover they are cheaper than LEO's and that is a whole other problem.

I am also with Howard on this but I think we are to far down the road ;-/

[rixchard]

I guess I am old school in the game of cops n robbers I still would rather have a human making the decisions.

Ok I'll bite. Where is a human not making a decision? All this tech does is scan,record and report.

[OneShot]

As easy as it is, let's not be so quick to blame the government, & law enforcement. Focus on what this technology is looking for; law breakers and criminals.
Hate the bad guys.

I hate the delays at the airports just like everyone else. I've caught myself finding it easy to hate airport security until I remembered I should be hating those trying to kill us.
For me thinking this way and taking a deep breath chills me out fast and my blood pressure resumes back to normal.

This technology will also be a positive asset in finding missing children as well.

I like it.

[UncleRock]

And what gives the government right? Is it the fact that the professional politician's have turned the Constitution into a piece of toilet paper?
That is correct, I have a habit of asking LEO's what is correct, to enforce a towns law or the constitution they swore to uphold. Is that elected offical worth their giving up their professional and personal truth and honor?
Happilly over 95% have responded in a manner that I consider worthy of their calling!

Rock
Spell check not working?
Never saw the site this slow

[midwilshire]

Why don't we fast-forward 50 years and just implant a transponder in every baby at birth?Isn't there a qualititative difference between the privacy of one's physical body and the privacy of one's vehicle on public roads?

Current law recognizes this difference by protecting the former but not the latter. Perhaps you're suggesting that these cameras take an important step toward erroding the importance of that distinction? You might be right. They do seem to impersonalize the game a bit. But it's quite a jump.

[midwilshire]

There are 4 ANPR teams in London and they are making over 200 arrests per month ...

I am also with Howard on this but I think we are to far down the road ;-/My sense is that England is much further down the road than that US. I've read that there are 4 million CCTV cameras watching the public streets, parking lots, etc. over there. London residents are caught on camera around 300 times per day. And isn't there a service allowing citizens - for a fee - to monitor those cameras and report their observations to police? The English are willing participants in their own surveillance state. Lovely.

But then again, England has a history of oppressive government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Raj) and the US has a history of telling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_tea_party) oppressive government to shove it (http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm) when it crosses the line. It's become a part of our cultural identity.

My hope is that US society hasn't been so enfeebled with terrorism fears (http://www.dmh.missouri.gov/diroffice/disaster/documents/grant_resource_cd/VII-CD-ROM%20Online%20Resources/Federal%20Emergency%20Management%20Agency_files/t_home.gif) that we've given up that grit.

I'm guessing that a CCTV camera is more expensive than a .223 round. :mad:

[ksailor]

There are cameras mounted on street corners in the US; there are pix-takers over the center lane on many super-slabs in the US; mounted on helmets; in LEO cars; in banks; on ATMs; in airports; in the supermarkets, K-Mart, W-Mart and every other mart; at toll booths; security cameras near court houses and critical infrastructure buildings.

I'm glad someone is watching the bad guys - I just can't stand it when someone is watching ME!!!

Guess I'm just paranoid! :eek:

[hschisler]

Isn't there a qualititative difference between the privacy of one's physical body and the privacy of one's vehicle on public roads?

Current law recognizes this difference by protecting the former but not the latter. Perhaps you're suggesting that these cameras take an important step toward erroding the importance of that distinction? You might be right. They do seem to impersonalize the game a bit. But it's quite a jump.Michael, I was hoping you'd jump with an attorney's point of view. I always enjoy (OK, I usually enjoy :D) reading your posts.

My "let's implant a device at birth" remark was meant to stimulate conversation, of course. I hope it's done that. I think it can be useful to take an idea to a silly extreme sometimes, in order to point out the possible long-term outcomes of present-day policies or actions.

[OneShot]

Video cameras were recently install at my local FOP range. They weren't installed to catch felons hanging out at a police range, but to catch local yahoos distroying the place when no one was around.

My license plate (tag) is always video taped when I'm there and there's a camera down range filming me shoot in its direction. I'm not there to distroy the place, so the cameras don't bother me.

I blame the damn yahoos for causing the police to install the cameras.
Damn Yahoos! :mad:

Anyway, the range never looked so good before. :)

[Steve_R]

Why don't we fast-forward 50 years and just implant a transponder in every baby at birth? That way we could monitor their vital signs... "for their protection"; their location... "to ensure they aren't somewhere they aren't supposed to be", and how long they have been there... "for our protection". This would make the jobs of parents, truant officers, police officers, probation officers, hospitals, civil engineers, and traffic planners so much easier and more efficient. :rolleyes: You mean one of these (http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9901/14/chipman.idg/). Not in me anytime, anywhere or anyhow. :stir:

[deputy5211]

At present, some LEOs run LPs of cars cruising the streets, and sometimes in parking lots, looking for a vehicle with a "hit" of some sort. It is the officer who decides whether to take any further action.

The automated system in the video does the same thing, but is able to process many more plates in a shorter time. Operational safety is improved because the officer can keep his/her eyes scanning while driving instead of looking down at the screen/keyboard. It strikes me that this just a high tech version of the old-fashioned "hot sheet" and/or BOLO.

If the system only alerts on non-insured or stolen vehicles, or vehicles with a "regional" hit as a potential instrument in a crime, I see this as a win for the public AS LONG AS the LP data for non-flagged vehicles is IMMEDIATELY discarded. I would object to the retention of this data.

[jayz9705]

I am certain this would be a boon to law enforcement, and that it will do what it is touted to accomplish.

I am equally certain that the powers-that-be will find new and exciting ways to turn this into the very thing we all abhor so much, BIG BROTHER!

When better mousetraps are invented, the result will be smarter mice, and more devious people to set the traps!

[Dix42]

I agree with Kevin. I don't like the fact that credit agencies can put any information they want on your credit history and you can't get it off even if they are wrong. I also don't know why your credit score should have anything to do with insurance rates.

[deputy5211]

I am certain this would be a boon to law enforcement, and that it will do what it is touted to accomplish.

Would it not be a boon to society if it accomplishes this, even if all it did was get stolen vehicles recovered and identify uninsured vehicles for enforcement upon verification (Ever been hit by an uninsured driver? How much do you pay for uninsured motorist protection?


I am equally certain that the powers-that-be will find new and exciting ways to turn this into the very thing we all abhor so much, BIG BROTHER!

I agree that this is a possibility that has to be safeguarded against, and that there would have to be strict rules, accountability, and oversight.



When better mousetraps are invented, the result will be smarter mice, and more devious people to set the traps!
Another possibility is that we do away with mousetraps and let the mice take over. ;)

[deputy5211]

I agree with Kevin. I don't like the fact that credit agencies can put any information they want on your credit history and you can't get it off even if they are wrong. I also don't know why your credit score should have anything to do with insurance rates.

As I understand it, credit report is a problematic system for consumers. Remember that the credit agencies make their money by selling their services to business, and they know how their bread is buttered. I have heard hearsay tales of legitimate disputes being cast aside under a scenario like:

Consumer: I dispute this because .
Credit Bureau: ([I]to consumer) We will attempt to verify this with the credit grantor.
Credit Buearu: (to creditor) Please verify this reported obligation as accurate [wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say no more].
Creditor: (to credit bureau) This information is accurate as reported.
Credit Bureau: (to consumer) XYZ Corp. has verified the debt as valid. If you still disagree, you may submit a written statement to add to your credit report, which means almost noting in these times of automated credit processing.

As for insurance companies, the argument I have been given is that people with credit "problems" (whatever that means) are more likely to have "questionable" claims, making them a higher risk. Many public sector employers use credit as part of the pre-hire screening process using a similar reason.

I'm not saying it is right or wrong, I'm just passing on what I have heard. . .

[jayjacobson]

And what gives the government right? Is it the fact that the professional politician's have turned the Constitution into a piece of toilet paper?
Grif, didn't you know: your constitutional rights are void where prohibited by law! (LOL).

[hschisler]

...If the system only alerts on non-insured or stolen vehicles, or vehicles with a "regional" hit as a potential instrument in a crime, I see this as a win for the public AS LONG AS the LP data for non-flagged vehicles is IMMEDIATELY discarded. I would object to the retention of this data.And those key words ("AS LONG AS") are where things go wrong. Anybody who has ever worked in IT knows that once data runs through a system it's backed up/archived/saved somewhere, and there can be no 100%-certain safeguards that ensure someone doesn't grab a copy along the way. It's just not fool-proof or tamper-proof and all it takes is one person...

[deputy5211]

And those key words ("AS LONG AS") are where things go wrong. Anybody who has ever worked in IT knows that once data runs through a system it's backed up/archived/saved somewhere, and there can be no 100%-certain safeguards that ensure someone doesn't grab a copy along the way. It's just not fool-proof or tamper-proof and all it takes is one person...

Would you agree that the data is saved only if the system is programmed to save it? If the application is written not to log the automated inquiries, well, I imagine you see where I am going with this.

Also, I don't believe that this real issue is whether the LP is run or not, it seems more that the concern is whether location/movement history is captured. If the return is flagged for the officer, the only way the system would know "where" is if positional (ie GPS) data is transmitted as well. This could be bad, and I would be hard pressed to imagine a justification for handling it this way.

[hschisler]

Would you agree that the data is saved only if the system is programmed to save it? If the application is written not to log the automated inquiries, well, I imagine you see where I am going with this.

Also, I don't believe that this real issue is whether the LP is run or not, it seems more that the concern is whether location/movement history is captured. If the return is flagged for the officer, the only way the system would know "where" is if positional (ie GPS) data is transmitted as well. This could be bad, and I would be hard pressed to imagine a justification for handling it this way.Well, I guess... yes. But there are so many levels of software in any system (especially midrange/mainframe systems) that a team of programmers might not know that the system they are working on has its data backed up.

As an example: The NRA sued to get information that showed the NICS records were not being destroyed within 24 hours, as required by law. Just because the law says "this data shall be destroyed" doesn't mean it is.

I haven't done a good job conveying my concern with things like this. How about this: My concern is that every advance in surveillance technology -- every new gadget, every new use for time-saving systems -- can (and usually is) mis-applied by someone trying to "protect" us or be more efficient. It can't take too much of a leap of faith to envision USAF Predator aircraft watching us, domestically. Microaircraft already exist; they could be used domestically. The ultimate sci-fi extension of this is the little spiders running around in The Minority Report. Or, Demolition Man -- complete coverage of the city by the police department. All for our protection...

[jayjacobson]

....Should the cell phone companies keep track of which cell site you drove by?....Kevin
You swerved into another interesting topic, Kevin. The cell companies "track" your movement via tower sites even if you ARE NOT on your phone. In other words, if your phone is just on, your movement is tracked. These records remain in their data bases for one year.....and are available via search warrant/subpena.

[Ted Shred]

I'm certainly not a fan of big brother and big government, but I think that this particular tool is great for finding stolen cars, expired tags and un-insured cars...

[dlbushey]

I really hate to sound like the doom and gloom kind of person, but....

I can sit outside your home on a public street and using tempest equipment I can reproduce whatever you have on your computer screen.

I can get radio equipment and eavesdrop on any analog radio communication, including most older cordless phones.

If I had the money (like governments have) I can eavesdrop on any digital communication as well.

Pictures? I think someone said in an earlier post, any ATM, corner store, public building, traffic lights...there's pictures being taken of you everywhere, everyday.

The Google Earth picture of my house has both of my cars and my LT clearly visible in the driveway. Page over a few houses and you can see my neighbor sunbathing in her back yard....Hey...now THERE'S a use for surveillance!!!

This LP recognition system is just a tool. Say I have a car that has expired insurance. My state requires me to have insurance to drive on a public road. That’s the law. How is a LEO supposed to know that I’m in violation unless he does a detailed investigation? That’s what this tool does.

Let’s put it in perspective. I’m walking down the street carrying 3 pounds of dope to sell. A LEO walks right past me on foot patrol. How is he supposed to know I’m in violation? Now let’s say this LEO has a canine patrol officer with him. Guess what? NOW HE KNOWS. Simply another tool.

Of course any technology has the potential for abuse. This debate has been going on for along long time, and will continue long after you and I have departed this earth. What I don’t understand is this: Who cares?

What do I care if someone knows where I’ve been? The last time I checked, The US Constitution was still in effect, including the right to privacy. This information simply cannot be used against you unless you’re doing something you’re not supposed to be doing.

For what ever it’s worth (2 cents MAYBE) that’s my opinion.

[arwadowd]

The US Constitution was still in effect, including the right to privacy. This information simply cannot be used against you unless you’re doing something you’re not supposed to be doing.

The info just will not disappear. Just because YOU aren't doing anything wrong doesn't mean someone else can't utilize your image, whereabouts, info, for strange and nefarious purposes.

Past a few of the basics (killing your neighbor and stealing his stuff, etc.), doing something "wrong" changes as society evolves.

A tool is a tool. In the past a misused tool (rock, camera, gun, whatever) could generally be tracked to an individual. The profusion of digital information flings itself wantonly towards criminal abuse.

Right to privacy? Paranoia? Ackkkk!

Dinner calls.....

Jim

[ahpd1992]

I guess I am just afraid. Im not all the techno savy and its like finding out the shades were open when I was walking around in the nude. If I didnt know I was being watched I probably would be ignorantly blissful and not cared, but when I hear things like this are out there it just frightens me because right now I feel like I have privacy, but I guess that is not reality anymore. I didnt know there was "a man behind the curtain". Now I have to rethink my concept of privacy. Although Im an LEO I do my job because I believe in our system of individual rights and even though this technology makes my job easier I just dont see the need. I dont want the US to become like England, all those cameras is just a bit too Orwellian for my comfort.

gotta go, the donuts just came out of the fryer, mmmm, mmmm, paradise

Tom

[Morley]

This information simply cannot be used against you unless you’re doing something you’re not supposed to be doing.

It can't??? Who says it can't? With this kind of surveillance avialable and in every day use on every street corner, tied into what's already being used, anyone can easily track your (or your family's) every movement without ever having to leave the comfort of their own home/office and without having to invest much money or time into the effort. If you think the kind of network this system will be employed on will be "secure" from hackers, think again. Not to mention that there are plenty of unscruplious people already employed/elected to positions where they'd have free and ready access to this network. this kind of thing gives me the creeps :eek:

[meese]

The Google Earth picture of my house has both of my cars and my LT clearly visible in the driveway. Page over a few houses and you can see my neighbor sunbathing in her back yard...Exactly where do you live, Dave? ;)

Personally, I'm worried that some satellite photo will catch me out in my yard washing my LT. If that gets onto Google Earth, then my reputation here is ruined. :)

And yes, I'm more concerned about the very real possibility of abuse of this system over the perceived benefits. If this kind of info is being made public, just imagine what They have already that they're not telling us about. :eek:

[jayjacobson]

I really hate to sound like the doom and gloom kind of person, but....

If I had the money (like governments have) I can eavesdrop on any digital communication as well.

What do I care if someone knows where I’ve been? The last time I checked, The US Constitution was still in effect, including the right to privacy. This information simply cannot be used against you unless you’re doing something you’re not supposed to be doing....
Capturing digital radio transmissions is possible for a reasonable price.

I wouldn't call you a doom and gloomer at all. I'd say that you are pretty optimistic.

[grahamw]

The CIA say they will be good:

https://www.cia.gov/cia/notices.html#priv

"The Central Intelligence Agency is committed to protecting your
privacy and will collect no personal information about you unless you
choose to provide that information to us."

So it must be true ;-))

[pjessen]

Its amazing to me that no one has brought this up...although someone going through divorce may not be doing something illegal, don't think that the attorneys wouldn't love to have a track of what the "other" spouse has been doing 24/7 for the past six months and make hay out of it!

Recently, when the Dolphins coach continually denied he was going to Alabama, the aviation tracking site had a jillion hits to see if a certain aircraft was headed to U of A from Miami. This seems innocent enough, unless it was a diplomat negotiating a treaty, or a company CEO wrestling a merger. Ohh, forgot...they already track those movements! Next step is the bad guys tracking shipments of cash and negotiable securities to detect vulnerable periods of transit, and bankers and store owners as they move to and from work. Big Step-Brother!

Since cell phone companies can track your phone now, they can also record all your conversations and make them available to the highest bidder. Dang right; it will happen.

I carry an amazing electronic device. Its a pacemaker with defibrillator. The little girl at the doc's office reads it every 90 days to see if there have been any significant cardiac "events". Its a fabulous device, but with a couple of modified chips could record and store a jillion other "events". At my age and deportment, I don't care, personally, but I'm very concerned for the future.

I love the license plate techno, but I also have no reason to believe that every time it goes off that the LEO gives chase. I have a hunch here in CO they'd need roadblocks to write up all the uninsured. My guess is that they'd issue ear plugs to those officers complaining that the device constantly gives off an annoying beep.

The traffic light cameras smack of revenue generating devices, as do others. The license plate makes much more sense by comparison, as it proactively goes after real scumbags.

[kevincook]

My wife has been hit twice while stopped at a red light. BOTH drivers were uninsured. What are the odds of that happening? We ended up paying the deductible to repair her car twice. The DMV should suspend their license and require restitution before having it re-issued.

I think the tow companies would love this. The police find an uninsured vehicle and impound the vehicle. Pretty soon people would figure out that it is cheaper to properly insure their car than to have it impounded.

Kevin

[ldrider]

you need to pull the battery, not just turn it off

The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a mobile phone's microphone and using it to eavesdrop on nearby conversations.


http://news.com.com/2100-1029_3-6140191.html

[Zotter]

Capturing digital radio transmissions is possible for a reasonable price.


Unencrypted digital RF traffic is trivial to intercept with 'off the shelf' toys. Well, most of it anyway. Just get yourself an APCO-25 compatable scanner (http://www.signalharbor.com/apco25.html) - say from your local Shaque de Rat and tune in.

'Round these here parts, they use a 'high bit count' rotating key encryption scheme. I think it's 3DES based(??). You can follow the convo with an APCO-25 scanner, but can't understand what they're saying. Seems Secret service likes our local LEO's encrypted 800Mhz digital trunking radio system so well, some of 'em use it when the VP is in town.

They can change the key at will, enable or disable channels, features or entire radios from dispatch. Emergency call buttons, triangulation locaters, etc. Still don't know why they don't put any kind of GPS in their car radios though. Maybe having facts would make some reports a bit tricky or otherwise increase liability somehow.

[Steve_R]

Personally, I'm worried that some satellite photo will catch me out in my yard washing my LT. If that gets onto Google Earth, then my reputation here is ruined. You did that at CCR this past year. :histerica

[jayjacobson]

My wife has been hit twice while stopped at a red light. BOTH drivers were uninsured. What are the odds of that happening? We ended up paying the deductible to repair her car twice. The DMV should suspend their license and require restitution before having it re-issued.

I think the tow companies would love this. The police find an uninsured vehicle and impound the vehicle. Pretty soon people would figure out that it is cheaper to properly insure their car than to have it impounded.

Kevin
Actually Kevin, with as many uninsured/unlicensed/suspended license drivers on the road, your odds are very good (as you found out).

In CA (I mean KA), the DMV does suspend their license (if they even have one to begin with) for not having insurance.

Meanwhile, our insurance rates go up to cover all these clowns! The law just views these drivers as petty criminals. But, after you experience the death and destruction first hand, you realize they are much more than just petty criminals.

There is no provision in the KA vehicle code for the impounding of a vehicle for the driver merely not having insurance.