BF2S Forums State of the Union 2011

UnkleRukus wrote:

lowing wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

Dude, I'm just getting my facts straight here.

The facts are addressed already, your conclusions based on what you just read is off the mark. I merely suggested you go back and re-read what was said, maybe you can draw a more coherent conclusion.

Or maybe you can not be a dickhead for once in your life. I'm one of those people who needs to be shown things. That's how I learn. I don't learn by having some bloke tell me to "go read this subject you know very little about and come back and make an opinion on it."

UnkleRukus wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

Or maybe you can not be a dickhead for once in your life. I'm one of those people who needs to be shown things. That's how I learn. I don't learn by having some bloke tell me to "go read this subject you know very little about and come back and make an opinion on it."

Sounds like you have a learning disability. trolololol

Well my town did have one of those "state schools" in it.

lowing wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

lowing wrote:

The facts are addressed already, your conclusions based on what you just read is off the mark. I merely suggested you go back and re-read what was said, maybe you can draw a more coherent conclusion.

Or maybe you can not be a dickhead for once in your life. I'm one of those people who needs to be shown things. That's how I learn. I don't learn by having some bloke tell me to "go read this subject you know very little about and come back and make an opinion on it."

Sorry, when I said you need insurance to finance a car or register it to drive on public roads, and that you do not need insurance to buy a car, I kinda assumed it meant exactly that, and not the conclusions you came up with, that why buy a car if you can't drive it.

JohnG@lt wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

lowing wrote:

might wanna go back read what I posted then make a different comment. One that address what I said.

Dude, I'm just getting my facts straight here.

You need insurance to get plates. You don't need it to purchase the vehicle.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

lowing wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

Dude, I'm just getting my facts straight here.

The facts are addressed already, your conclusions based on what you just read is off the mark. I merely suggested you go back and re-read what was said, maybe you can draw a more coherent conclusion.

Perhaps he is young ? How old are you Unkel ?

SenorToenails wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

You need insurance to get plates. You don't need it to purchase the vehicle.

So basically, you do need insurance one way or another in order to buy and then operate a vehicle.

My point stands.

You can own the car without insurance.  You can operate it solely on private land without insurance.  To take it out on public roads, liability insurance makes perfect sense...since you can totally fuck up someone else's person or property with it.  If your car has a lein on it, then you need collision and comprehensive as well, to protect the bank (since the car is collateral).  At least, this is how it is in NY.

11 Bravo wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

you don't need insurance to finance a vehicle.  At least in California.

really?  i find that odd tbh.  what is the reasoning behind that?

SenorToenails wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

You need insurance to get plates. You don't need it to purchase the vehicle.

So basically, you do need insurance one way or another in order to buy and then operate a vehicle.

My point stands.

You can own the car without insurance.  You can operate it solely on private land without insurance.  To take it out on public roads, liability insurance makes perfect sense...since you can totally fuck up someone else's person or property with it.  If your car has a lein on it, then you need collision and comprehensive as well, to protect the bank (since the car is collateral).  At least, this is how it is in NY.

11 Bravo wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

you don't need insurance to finance a vehicle.  At least in California.

really?  i find that odd tbh.  what is the reasoning behind that?

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

you don't need insurance to finance a vehicle.  At least in California.

really?  i find that odd tbh.  what is the reasoning behind that?

You need insurance AFTER you finance the vehicle, to protect the financed asset.  But for the initial finance, they do not require insurance.

Poseidon wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

You're right, it does make perfect sense. I'm not arguing the law. I'm just saying, in essence, there IS another form of a government mandate that forces you to get insurance.

But only if you want to use public roads.  And mostly it's to protect everyone else, not you.  You don't need to own a car to get around, so only convenience is the 'force' here.

Yes, but who buys a car to drive it on private roads only? And I understand it's to protect other people, I understand that 100%. But at the same time, it's exactly the point I made. The typical person who buys a car to commute to work or for whatever normal reason is going to be forced to buy insurance at one point.

Last edited by SenorToenails (2011-01-27 17:00:41)