Insurance Requirement for Car Owners, and Now Dog Owners?

J

jps

Valued Senior Member
http://www.ny1.com/ny/TopStories/SubTopic/index.html?topicintid=1&subtopicintid=1&contentintid=39046
Dog owners in New York State may soon be required to buy liability insurance for their pet.

State lawmakers are considering the legislation to help the growing number of victims of dog bites and attacks.

The insurance would cost between $75 and $150 a year, covering up to $10,000 in medical costs.

Just like car owners, dog owners would be subject to a $100 fine for not keeping an insurance tag on their dog. Uninsured canines would be impounded until the owner buys the coverage.

If a dog is impounded more than two weeks, authorities would have the option of putting it up for adoption or euthanizing it.
Click to expand...

I think this is a terrible idea, for both dogs and cars. I know a number of people who don't drive(or drive illegally) because they simply can't afford insurance. This makes it very hard to hold a job in rural areas where nothing is within walking distance. Dogs are unessential for most people, and as such this new requirment won't keep people in poverty, but it will make pet ownership unattainable to many who woulde benefit from it, and result in a drop in adoptions. Its starting out at 75-150 dollars a year, quite manageable for most people, but there's no reason to think it will stay that low.
I understand the argument that without these requirements there will be no one to pay for medical bills or property damage caused by dogs/cars, but how far are we going to take that idea? Is this insurance even required for gun owners?
Should it be required for every item we purchase that has a remote chance of hurting someone?
 
If you can afford a car then why can't you afford an extra hundred bucks for insurance? And no-one says you HAVE to have insurance for a car, its not illegal to drive without it, it'll just cost you a bit for repairs if you crash.
 
You must have insurance here in Canada. It's illegal to drive without it. Like jps here said, there is a fine for driving without insurance on your vehicle.
 
rainbow__princess_4 said:
If you can afford a car then why can't you afford an extra hundred bucks for insurance?
Click to expand...
Per month
And no-one says you HAVE to have insurance for a car, its not illegal to drive without it
Click to expand...
It sure is.
 
So your dog isn't covered by your homeowners'? Hell, if your mother-in-law trips and burns herself on your oven, it's your fault. (Happened to a judge once; I remember half-inch in an Oregon newspaper about it years ago.)

I've never had problems with dogs. I have a simple rule that I learned from GI Joe ("Learning is half the battle!") and the Superfriends ("I forget the tagline") that you shouldn't go near an animal you don't know well.

Which reminds me - where are the Kratt brothers in all of this? Where's that dude that used to have the pet show on FX? Hello? Your animals are calling!
 
This new dog insurance will be around 100 bucks a year to start out, which won't be a problem for most people as long as it stays that low, which I do not consider likely. Car insurance, depending on where you live and your background can cost that per month. You can buy a car that runs for the one time cost of a couple hundred dollars.
 
hey, I just heard just then on the Australian News on TV about this dog insurance thing (because of course anything happening in America is more important than anything here) and they said that the insurance is only for dogs which weigh more than 50 kg. Firstly, what kind of a dog weighs more than 50 kgs! (retorical-i know that some breeds are that big) and secondly, to the few people who DO have them, its probably true that if their dog hurts someone then it will be a lot worse than a smaller dog. Also on the news they said that it was "proposed" so it probably won't even go ahead.
 
tiassa said:
So your dog isn't covered by your homeowners'? Hell, if your mother-in-law trips and burns herself on your oven, it's your fault. (Happened to a judge once; I remember half-inch in an Oregon newspaper about it years ago.)

I've never had problems with dogs. I have a simple rule that I learned from GI Joe ("Learning is half the battle!") and the Superfriends ("I forget the tagline") that you shouldn't go near an animal you don't know well.

Which reminds me - where are the Kratt brothers in all of this? Where's that dude that used to have the pet show on FX? Hello? Your animals are calling!
Click to expand...

God. Why doesn’t everyone have your common sense? I agree with you 1,000%. Did you know that some larger insurance companies will ask you on your Home Owner’s app. if you have a dog, and if you do; what is the breed, and has it ever bitten any one. You can only imagine what the underwriter would say about that.
 
Its sad we are moving in this direction. No one uses common sense anymore. Everyone is sooo damn quick to sue people. Look at the little old lady who sued McDonalds for hot coffee she spilled. Come on people!!! Coffee is hot!! People are morons! They should have a "you're dumb" law. If you do something to that effect(hot coffee spilling) You're dumb-get over it!
 
darktr00per said:
Its sad we are moving in this direction. No one uses common sense anymore. Everyone is sooo damn quick to sue people. Look at the little old lady who sued McDonalds for hot coffee she spilled. Come on people!!! Coffee is hot!! People are morons! They should have a "you're dumb" law. If you do something to that effect(hot coffee spilling) You're dumb-get over it!
Click to expand...
I think your idea for a "you're dumb" law is a great one! Then we could run a spay and neuter clinic so that the morons would stop spreading the "dumb" gene. :D Frivolous lawsuits would be a thing of the past.
 
It is illegal to drive without insurance in most U.S. states. The insurance company issues a little "proof of insurance" card that you'd better have with you if you get stopped, and you have to send one in with your registration renewal. If you cancel your insurance the insurance company notifies the DMV immediately. Nonetheless a lot of people manage to drive without insurance. So guess what, the insurance companies sell us "uninsured motorist protection," which pays off if we get smashed by some bozo without insurance. I don't believe you can buy a policy (in most states anyway) that does not include this coverage -- and of course the premium for it.

Some states offer the sensible alternative of putting up a bond, in effect self-insuring. The amount of the bond is far less than the present value of all the insurance premiums you will pay throughout your life, so it's a great deal if you can raise the money. You could even have one or two major accidents during your life that would require replenishing the bond and you'd still come out ahead.

The 50 kg (110 lb) minimum for dog insurance is humorous. I don't know what the statistics are now, but 20 years ago more Americans were bitten by Lhasa Apsos than any other breed. The breeds that you hear the most bite stories about are Doberman Pinschers, which are way below that weight, and Rottweilers, which hover just around it. Irish Wolfhounds are bigger but they're pretty well behaved with humans like most hunting dogs. Ditto for Great Pyrenees, herding dogs don't bite people. There are a few certifiably insane Saint Bernards out there, but few people are dumb enough to let them loose.

We live in a remote area with bears and cougars, and we have a dog (Anatolian Guardian) that was specifically bred for the purpose of driving off predators or killing them if necessary, and she only weighs 90 lb (40 kg). She's very effective. We're the only house that's never been invaded by a bear.

What we need is to chain the law schools shut and let the number of lawyers in the U.S.A. fall by attrition as they die off. That will greatly reduce everyone's need for insurance.
 
owners of "dangerous" dogs have always (or as long as i've been alive) had to have insurance on their dog in new york. you have to pay a required high insurance premium on dogs like pitbulls, rottweilers, dobermans, etc. pitbulls are a popular dog in my neighborhood so me mum told me how much it costs to keep one around there.
 
Pitbulls are really not as dangerous to humans as urban legend has it. Every breed does its share of biting but pitbulls don't really do more than their share (which is nothing to sneeze at since dogs are, after all, domesticated wolves). It's just that they have a bad rep so people notice and remember pitbull bites more than poodle bites. Pitbulls were raised for fighting. People who handle fighting dogs, who have stronger jaws and sharper teeth than the average breed, have no absolutely no tolerance for dogs that bite people. The ones that do don't get to stay in the gene pool. Pitbulls are presumed to be tough so people keep them as watchdogs but it's all a big act. What pitbulls do bite is other people's pets. I wouldn't want one in my neighborhood because he'd keep getting into my yard and picking fights with my little dogs and killing them. Then I'd have to kill both him and the asshole who brought him into my neighborhood and then I'd go to jail.

That's why I don't like pitbulls.

It's a real shame about rottweilers. They were originally developed by the Romans as draft animals. They're big enough to pull carts in mountainous regions where horses aren't practical. It's only been in the last few decades that people have started training them to be killers.

Some people should just be thrown in a pit full of wolves, the old Viking way of punishing particularly pesky enemies.
 
In Chicago pit bulls are illegal to own now, due to dog fighting and bites. Ok now what? knives are illegal because of stabbings? its not the tool its the person behind it. Whats to stop these people from training other breeds of dogs for fighting. The answer is not more laws! lets take a look at WHY this stuff happens. Poverty? Insanity? or whatever the hell, lets stop it at the core or root of the problem. More laws dont solve crap.
 
I cant wait for people to get sick of all the laws and do something about it. Again, why have people lost so much common sense that we need the government to tell us what to do in all aspects of our life!
 
darktr00per said:
Its sad we are moving in this direction. No one uses common sense anymore. Everyone is sooo damn quick to sue people. Look at the little old lady who sued McDonalds for hot coffee she spilled. Come on people!!! Coffee is hot!! People are morons! They should have a "you're dumb" law. If you do something to that effect(hot coffee spilling) You're dumb-get over it!
Click to expand...
Don't forget the effing morons who let their dogs roam free. There have been a number of children killed who were minding their own business when a dog or two decided to tear into them. In many if not most cases, these attacks could have been avoided if the owners took simple, common-sense precautions such as hmm... not letting their 120lb predator roam the streets.

Personally, I think the best solution is to make the owners criminally liable unless they can solidly demonstrate that they took proper precautions and that the dog has not previously harmed anyone. Those amateurs (as opposed to professionals) who are so stupid as to try to train their dog as a guard or attack dog should be even more culpable for specifically training the dog to aggress against humans.

Corporate liability is a little different as it takes into account a corporation's ability to distribute its burden but I do think the trend to completely eliminate any personal culpability for one's own actions is asinine. I'd like to see the dumb law enacted as well although one would think judges were capable of some discretion in the matter.

In business law class my favorite absurd suit was the 'refrigerator race'. Apparently some total fucking morons somewhere have this yearly race where the runners strap full sized refrigerators to their backs and then run a 50meter 'dash' or the like. One moron injured his back, sued the manufacturer and won. Personally I think he should have been shot, it would have been more humane.

Then again, I cut my finger chopping onions the other day... perhaps I'll sue. Sharp knives are a dangerous product and there was no warning label. How was I supposed to know? ;)

~Raithere
 
The breeds most discriminated against (mastiff and bull breeds) are actually the calmest and least likely to bite someone for no reason.
They just happen to be really good at biting people when they do it so they have a bad rap.
Who hasn't been bitten by a dog? I've been bitten by heaps but they didn't injure me enough for anyone to ever hear about it.
I've spent more time around mastiff and bull breeds than any others by far but i've never been bitten by one. They are unbelievably tolerant to an extraordinary degree.
But they attract low lifes (usually, me being the exception :D) who torment them thinking it will make them tough and it just makes them crazy. A labrador raised by the average pitbull owner would wind up killing children as well. It would probably be more likely, for the number of mistreated pitbulls there are there is an incredibly low number of attacks. They are ghandi-esque saints in reality, I bet someone could have found ghandi's breaking point, and people are going to great lengths to find the breaking points of their pitbulls. Thats the problem, but it doesn't get addressed or even acknowledged.

I think dogs should be allowed to kill intruders. Especially if you have a no tresspassing sign. Its pretty simple, don't break into someones house if you don't want to die. I don't understand the confusion.
Why are there laws protecting criminals but none protecting dogs that do their job?
And why should you be penalised for having a competent canine security guard?
I'm starting to know how gays feel, the 'straight' people with alarms and good locks get all the standard benefits but the 'queer' dog owners get fucked... in the ass.

Thats all i meant when I said I know how gays feel, I meant in the sense of what its like to be sodomised. I didn't mean like what its like to not have the same rights as other people, that would be awfull, I have no idea what thats like.
 
Dr Lou Natic...... What if a child goes into your yard to get a ball that went over the fence? What would you say if your dog attacked the child that wasn't thinking about a dog bitting them? Or how about a meter reader or postal worker delivering the mail? Many problems with what you bring up about letting dogs kill intruders for dogs cannot tell the differences between bad intruders and good visitors, then what would you think if a child was mauled to death when the child was only retrieving his/her ball?




There are a few problems with insurance with dogs. A person could just let their dog run free without insurances and if the dog were to bite someone the owners would say it wasn't their dog because there's no dog tag on the dog proving it was theirs. To prove ownership of any animals you have to have them tagged with a licence that proves it is someones dog otherwise people will not say it was their dog if it were to attack someone.

If someone is bitten inside of your yard your homeowners insurance will cover the medical costs most of the time but nowadays insurance companies are asking people to pay extra for a rider to have pets insured and sometimes will not insure a large, aggressive dogs. The problem is when the dog leaves the homeowners property and attacks someone, then the homeowners does not cover the damages. That is why a seperate insurance is needed to cover the costs if the homeowners dog does attack someone and injure them.

I'd think that this would be a good idea as long as the insurance would also cover any veteranary bills if the dog was to need to have need of a vet. People have medical insurances so why not incorporate the medical with the liability? Just a thought.
 
I agree with the plan and think it's a great incentive for people to start taking responsibility for their dogs.

Dog attacks should never happen, only f#ckheads let their dogs attack people accidently.

- Jacko is Wacko (Stop Pedophiles) -
 
cosmictraveler said:
Dr Lou Natic...... What if a child goes into your yard to get a ball that went over the fence? What would you say if your dog attacked the child that wasn't thinking about a dog bitting them? Or how about a meter reader or postal worker delivering the mail? Many problems with what you bring up about letting dogs kill intruders for dogs cannot tell the differences between bad intruders and good visitors, then what would you think if a child was mauled to death when the child was only retrieving his/her ball?
Click to expand...
Obviously if the law was changed society would have to change with it. People would know that now entering strangers yards is risking your life. They'd be filled in that that was the deal. Parents would warn children to never go into someones yard, meter readers would be warned to not go into peoples yards unless they want to die. Like I said its not complicated. Everyone could just get it into their head that going into a strangers yard is like falling asleep on railroad tracks. DON'T DO IT.

And anyway the dogs I deal with can tell the difference between threats and idiots/children. But if some idiot kid did climb into my yard and get nailed I wouldn't feel guilty. Just like I wouldn't feel guilty if a kid came into my back yard and stuck a fork in a powerpoint. I'd think 'what a dumb kid' on both counts.
To me it would feel like some kid accidently committed suicide near me. Not my problem. At least it shouldn't be in an honest decent society.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top