It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Insurance companies team up with police departments in a SCAM to TAKE YOUR MONEY!!!

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Backstory- I was looking up info on fighting speeding tickets when i stumbled upon some info saying that insurance companies were donating radar guns to police departments in order to get more people tickets and raise insurance costs. it specifically said that geico donated $20,000,000 to police departed for radar guns. After some google research i quickly found that info on this is not so readily available. Pretty much the only available info is people saying stuff in other forums about it.

this is most of what i could find

This page was deleted but viewable in a cached version.

This is a Google search. The third link is to a news page with an article about geico and it mentions them donating radar guns. But when you open the link, the stuff in the description is no where to be found.

The OP of this post states a caller on a radio talk show revieled this info.

This is on a laser gun companies website and they put this under "common misconceptions"

These are the best i could find but no really good sources.
If any of you pro researchers could add to this that would be great.




posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Revealed





Not a big surprise. Anyone would do anything to get money these days. I never really liked the idea of car insurance. I'm paying them $1000 every year for NOTHING. Sure it would be handy if I get into a car accident but its not like I get into one of those on a weekly or everyday basis. And if I DO, they're go to raise the insurance costs with a leg or arm.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by balon0
 


$1000 a year? you have incredible insurance.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenObserver
reply to post by balon0
 


$1000 a year? you have incredible insurance.


Really? I pay about half that for full coverage on a fairly new vehicle.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Thanks everyone for turning my conspiracy thread into insurance comparison.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenObserver
reply to post by balon0
 


$1000 a year? you have incredible insurance.
I pay $254 every six months. Why waste so much on insurance which is just a scam anyway.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   
That's why I run a radar scanner and a laser jammer. Just make sure when you see the cop or get a beep you slow down and shut them off. Yes the laser jammer really does work. I got pulled over and searched for blowing by a cop and not registering a speed (4 jammers front and back). Just install it in your door and run the wires with the lock, window wires and they will never find it. If they do find it say you bought the car used and had no clue it was there.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776

Originally posted by GoldenObserver
reply to post by balon0
 


$1000 a year? you have incredible insurance.
I pay $254 every six months. Why waste so much on insurance which is just a scam anyway.


A scam? Then why did my insurance company pay out $1200 when I was sideswiped by a hit & run driver last month? I lost no points on the deal. They paid it without question. We never caught the guy.

The guy probably pays $1000 because he's in a higher-risk group. It's not as if you are given a choice.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


I pay about 2000 $ a year for my insurance. And if i have a accident, it does not include my car, only the other persons car.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776

Originally posted by GoldenObserver
reply to post by balon0
 


$1000 a year? you have incredible insurance.
I pay $254 every six months. Why waste so much on insurance which is just a scam anyway.


A scam?
The guy probably pays $1000 because he's in a higher-risk group. It's not as if you are given a choice.
You just answered your own question. 1) No choice, you must have insurance or you can't drive. 2) BS rules. Why do they need to check credit before selling you insurance? What does that have to do with driving? Why not check to see how loud you can yell or if you have blue eyes? Those are just as relevant. 3) I have had insurance since I was 16, almost 30 years I have been paying this money and never had an accident. It has been a complete waste of money I could have used for other things.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Right after my oldest daughter got her drivers license I got a call from the local PD telling me I need to put my daughter on my insurance, I asked the lady why what happened thinking maybe she got stopped the lady told me that it was nothing like that the police are checking to make sure when teens get there license that there parents put them on there insurance. I had already checked into getting my daughter insurance on her new car?! Is it just me or does anyone ells think this is strange? Insurance is the snake oil of our time imo I have never had a wreak but a guy side swiped my car once as it was parked out in front of where I work and insurance covered like 60% of what it took to fix it even though I had paid in thousands more on monthly payments and it was the other guy fault. star an flag OP thanks



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by iSHRED
 


Since this thread is on the verge of teetering off track into an online insurance comparison, I will comment only on the OP's original story.

It makes so much sense (unfortunately) that I'm inclined to believe it is very possible - especially in our current economic climate with cities and counties scrambling to secure revenue. I think going after the speed gun in traffic court may become more common - it seems to be the only small shred of incentive they have to keep the things, at least in theory, working properly.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Don't want to pay speeding fines ?

Simply follow the speed limit, Einstein. Or drive on the Autobahn, there's no limit on vast parts.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
This has been going on for a long time now, I thought most people knew about it already. The insurance companies donate radar guns and lasers and then make themselves sound great because they "donate equipment" to police departments to help improve safety. Now doesn't "we donate equipment to improve safety" sound better than "we pay for radar guns to help police write more tickets which they tell us about so we have an excuse to charge you even more."

Besides paying a little money for an excuse to jack up your rates, it's probably a nice tax deduction too.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776

Originally posted by schuyler

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776

Originally posted by GoldenObserver
reply to post by balon0
 


$1000 a year? you have incredible insurance.
I pay $254 every six months. Why waste so much on insurance which is just a scam anyway.


A scam?
The guy probably pays $1000 because he's in a higher-risk group. It's not as if you are given a choice.
You just answered your own question. 1) No choice, you must have insurance or you can't drive. 2) BS rules. Why do they need to check credit before selling you insurance? What does that have to do with driving? Why not check to see how loud you can yell or if you have blue eyes? Those are just as relevant. 3) I have had insurance since I was 16, almost 30 years I have been paying this money and never had an accident. It has been a complete waste of money I could have used for other things.


1.) That is correct, even though some people do not, probably the guy who hit me.

2.) I wrote to my company complaining about that, but the fact is statistically those with higher credit scores get into fewer accidents. There is a correlation between the two that can be proven. Yelling and eye color are not statistically relevant. Gender is, therefore companies rate young women differently than young men. My guess is race is also relevant, but they can't do that because it would be illegal, not because it isn't relevant.

Apparently there were internal arguments within the company whether to use credit scores, but they do. Since my credit score is high I do not get dinged by this arrangement. I think of it as a discount. My score went one notch lower for a year--because I applied for a credit card.

3. Good for you. Same here. I have been in two accidents, neither one of which I caused, in over 45 years. Your insurance protects you FROM other drivers as much as it protects other drivers from you, as my last "accident" (not) proves. Driving is a risk. You insure that risk. You could be in an accident tomorrow that made you liable to the tune of a million bucks easily. Just total a couple of cars and kill somebody--accidentally. If you don't insure that risk, you could lose everything.

Insurance is a pretty good value. Including my cars and house I pay about $100 per month for $3 million in coverage. That's more than my net worth, so I'm fully covered. It will pay for nearly anything that happens with very little deductible. It even pays for earthquake damage. (you get house insurance, car insurance at regular rates, then an "umbrella" policy that jacks liability up to $3 million (or $1 million))

Insurance is not a "scam." No one is "cheating" you out of your money. It's simply a way of spreading risk. If you are a good risk, you pay less, and that's how it should be.

A couple of good companies. It's regional for the Northwest, but if you're in Pemco territory, check it out. They only insure low-risk drivers, and their rates are the lowest I've ever come across. Nationally, USAA has a great reputation. It's for military families. Few people who have USAA ever switch away.


edit on 8/21/2011 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by iSHRED
 


Thank you for the thread. , I just want to say to all who are listening that The Powers That Be, Govt, State, City, County etc are in Violation of The Constitution when they Force a person to Buy Insurance or any product or service from private companies, against their will !!! One of The Courts, in the not too distant past ruled that it was Unconstitutional to Force a person To Buy Healthcare Insurance, Reason being they were being told they had to engage in commerce !!!! Your not required to engage in commerce ( Having to buy something, anything ) if you don't want to !!!

Thx



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
What a great thread op. I had to repost and say I hope people on here read this thread and tell their friends to check it out.. My post above this one is noteworthy!!

Thx again..



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by iSHRED
 


Thank you for the thread. , I just want to say to all who are listening that The Powers That Be, Govt, State, City, County etc are in Violation of The Constitution when they Force a person to Buy Insurance or any product or service from private companies, against their will !!! One of The Courts, in the not too distant past ruled that it was Unconstitutional to Force a person To Buy Healthcare Insurance, Reason being they were being told they had to engage in commerce !!!! Your not required to engage in commerce ( Having to buy something, anything ) if you don't want to !!!


That's a stretch. First of all, these are state laws, not federal laws. The recent circuit court of appeals ruled what you say in regards to federal mandates and the US Constitution, which has nothing to do with state laws. Secondly, one circuit court of appeals ruled the opposite, which means the matter is not settled until SCOTUS rules. Your conclusion is not justified by what has happened in the courts so far. Your post is not only not noteworthy, it's not even relevant. You completely misunderstood what the courts have said.
edit on 8/21/2011 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


Thx for the post... So your saying that State Laws, or Federal laws Trump The Constitution? You really think that is right? I am not saying that The Govt. or State can't pass a law that changes the Consttution, I am saying it's not Constitutionally Legal regardless of who tries it... Pease Read Below

The Commerce Clause, found in Section 8 of Article 1 of the Constitution, says: “The Congress shall have power to … regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”

Hatch said this constitutional language authorizes Congress to regulate some types of commercial “activity,” which is different from authorizing Congress to force an individual American to engage in a commercial activity he or she is not presently engaged in and--as a free person--does not want to engage in.

Now if the Federal Govt. is not allowed to do this to people , are you saying that States,,, Or anyother governing body is exempt for the Constitutions protection for the American People?



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by schuyler
 

Now if the Federal Govt. is not allowed to do this to people , are you saying that States,,, Or anyother governing body is exempt for the Constitutions protection for the American People?


The Constitution specifically grants the states all other powers in the Tenth Amendment. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." We have a state health care law in Massachussetts, do we not? Has that been successfully challenged?

Now, in regards to the requirement to purchase insurance, that's usually not what the state laws say. That's just common parlance. They usually are couched in terms of "financial responsibility." In other words, they don't require insurance, per se. They require you to establish fiscal responsibility. Sometimes that may be a deposit of money capable fo fulfilling any claims against you if you have an accident. It's just that insurance is the most obvious and cheapest way to establish your financial responsibility.

Secondly (and this is a point you did not address), a single appeals court has ruled against part of Obamacare. It is still in limbo. It's not settled. You cannot suddenly say that a state (not the Feds) cannot demand you buy auto insurance because a single circuit court (I think there are nine altogether) ruled against a part of a health care law. It's an apples and oranges comparison.




top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join