Arizona requires proof of auto insurance if you’re stopped, why is that different than proof of citizenship?
It’s against the law to not have insurance and it is against the law to drive without insurance. Proof of either appears to be consistent. Is it not?
Tags: Arizona Insurance, Auto Insurance, Proof Of Citizenship
March 9th, 2011 at 4:23 am
Its not…Majority of Americans support the new law..
March 12th, 2011 at 2:07 am
Ronald Fakin made us all buy auto insurance, whats so wrong with Obama making you buy HEALTH insurance!
March 13th, 2011 at 5:04 am
I do not carry my Birth Certificate with me.
I carry my Driver’s License in my Wallet and my Vehicle Registration and Insurance Card in my car.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:45 pm
police can only pull you over if they or another officer have witnessed you violating the law. the police already have the power to check citizenship during traffic stops. the new law lets them check your citizenship while your sitting on a parkbench.
March 18th, 2011 at 5:22 am
With what’s in your wallet, prove you are a citizen.
March 19th, 2011 at 8:45 pm
EVERY state has a requirement of proof of auto insurance. Citizenship has no bearing if you run into my car. I want to get paid, not learn a foreign language!
March 20th, 2011 at 11:24 am
White people won’t be stopped for this. People of Mexican background will. They will be stopped simply because of how they look. That is racial profiling. What part of equality don’t you understand?
March 20th, 2011 at 11:10 pm
Proof of insurance is not proof of citizenship. It just means you’re responsible enough to buy insurance in case a drunk illegal slams into you, but will never have to pay restitution.
March 21st, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Oh, and how do you expect to compare apples to apples to be of any help? Guess, the liberals failed to see there are alot of things that we already do that are border line legal/illegal and they fail to be up in arms about it. Find, detain, fine and deport same as find, detain, try, fine and require insurance.