When Alvan T. Fuller, leading Colonial motor car dealer, is made Governor of Massachusetts, his inaugural address touched upon the subject of ever- increasing automobile accidents and he said, partly:
A significant problem is that of the victim of automobile accidents, who finds it impossible to obtain financial redress for disability resulting from his misfortune. These victims often are the bread winners of families; their death or injury offers, as well as the personal tragedy, a fiscal problem. Approximately at least 60 percent from the owners and operators of cars of Massachusetts don’t carry personal liability car insurance. Thus in most cases the injured party doesn’t have redress.
I suggest that careful consideration be given to legislation which may require owners and drivers of cars to furnish to safeguard liability for private injuries or death caused by their cars.
Thus it came about over time the Bay State Legislature place it upon the statute books from the commonwealth that all Massachusetts automobile owners before being permitted to operate a car will need to take out insurance to pay possible victims of their negligence or recklessness.
That’s the sole reason why Massachusetts adopted compulsory automobile liability insurance. There upon that lone motive stand the sponsors from the legislation.
Opponents from the law, within their endeavors to go off its adoption in other states, however, charge it was urged as an accident preventive and that, instead, it’s increased accidents.
No such distortion from the truth can alter the truth that a personal canvass and survey from the situation shows financial redress for victims of accidents was the only object from the law’s proponents and that safer cars and saner drivers are, as they say, a happy by-product of its adoption.
It’s the personal opinion from the Star’s representative that a principle of and formula for safety unparalleled in the history of automobile legislation are inherent in what the law states, for the reason that it provides a simple yet marvelously comprehensive system of determining accident causation. This, all safety advocates agree, has been probably the most vital need and also at the same time the greatest stumbling-block of all efforts to locate a remedy for the country’s motor menace.
Massachusetts officials are impressive in the thoroughness that they’ve tabulated the opponents from the compulsory liability insurance law. In the objections of every they see a narrow, selfish viewpoint.
One of the law’s chief critics they cite the automobile manufacturers. This group, it is stated, sees the compulsory insurance law as a potential to deal with the sale of auto-mobiles. Among their organization’s primary functions would be to eliminate sales resistance forces, and therein, as Bay State officials view it, is their opposition to the statute. If you recenty had a DUI or DWI you must file for sr22
Then there are the finance companies, organizations deeply concerned with the wide sale of cars to persons who must buy on time.
