NORTH CAROLINA LAW HOLDS THAT I AM NOT REQUIRED TO SHOW PROOF OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER UNTIL

AFTER I HAVE BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT CAUSING AT LEAST $1,000.00 WORTH OF DAMAGE TO ANOTHER VEHICLE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 20 SECTION 20-166.1:
North Carolina Law at Chapter 20 Section 20-166.1 Reports and investigations required in event of accident clearly provides that I am not required to provide verification of LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE at the request of a law enforcement officer unless I was first involved in an ACCIDENT causing the minimum threshold of $1,000.00 worth of damage. See Section 20166.1 which reads in part:
20 -166.1. Reports and investigations required in event of accident. (a) Notice of Accident. The driver of a vehicle involved in a reportable accident must immediately, by the quickest means of communication, notify the appropriate law enforcement agency of the accident. . . . . (b) Insurance Verification. When requested to do so by the Division, the driver of a vehicle involved in a reportable accident must furnish proof of financial responsibility. . . . (e) Investigation by Officer. The appropriate law enforcement agency must investigate a reportable accident. A law -enforcement officer who investigates a reportable accident, whether at the scene of the accident or by subsequent investigations and interviews, must make a written report of the accident within 24 hours of the accident and must forward it as required by this subsection. The report must contain information on financial responsibility for the vehicle driven by the person whom the officer identified as at fault for the accident. . . . (Officer, are you investigating an accident?

North Carolina Law at Article 9A Motor Vehicle Safety and Financial Responsibility Act of 1953 clearly defines Proof of financial responsibility at Section 20-279.1 (11) and reads in part:
"Proof of financial responsibility": Proof of ability to respond in damages for liability, on account of accidents occurring subsequent to the effective date of said proof, arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle, in the amount of thirty thousand dollars

($30,000) because of bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident , and, subject to said limit for one person, in the amount of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) because of bodily injury to or death of two or more persons in any one accident, and in the amount of twenty -five thousand dollars ($25,000) because of injury to or destruction of property of others in any one accident. . . .

North Carolina Law at Section 20.279.6. further shows that even if I am in an accident which I caused, that I am not required to show proof of insurance if I caused no injury or damage to any person or property other than myself and my own car. See Section 20.279.6. which reads:
20 -279.6. Further exceptions to requirement of security. The requirements as to security and suspension in G.S. 20 - 279.5 shall not apply: (1) To the operator or the owner of a motor vehicle involved in an accident wherein no injury or damage was caused to the person or property of anyone other than such operator or owner, . . .

South Carolina Case law clearly provide that I have NO duty to provide evidence of operators security or INSURANCE unless I was first involved in an ACCIDENT causing bodily injury, death or damage to another vehicle in excess of $1,000.00.
Obligations Imposed by Article. The Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Act obliges a motorist either to post security or to carry liability insurance, NOT ACCIDENT INSURANCE, to indemnify all persons who might be injured by the insureds car. Moore v. Young, 263 N.C. 483, 139 S.E.2d 704 (1965); McKinney v. Morrow, 18 N.C. App. 282, 196 S.E.2d 585 cert. denied, 283 N.C. 665, 197 S.E.2d 874 (1973). The purpose of the Financial Responsibility Law is to protect victims of AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Shelby Mut. Ins. Co., 269 N.C. 341, 152 S.E.2d 436 (1967); The purpose of the Financial Responsibility Act is to provide protection from the negligent operation of automobiles. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hayes, 276 N.C. 620, 174 S.E.2d 51 (1970); It is only after an accident that one must furnish proof of financial responsibility or secure a liability policy to cover accidents in the future. Barkley v. International Mutual Insurance Company, 227 SC 38, 86 S.E.2d 602 (1955); The statute does not impose its requirements as to proof of financial responsibility until the occurrence of certain accidents, ... Royse v. Boldt, 491 P.2d 644 (Dec. 9, 1971); Mutual of Enumclaw v. Wiscomb, 622 P.2d 1234 (December 31, 1980); Mutual of Enumclaw v. Wiscomb, 643 P.2d 441 (April 8, 1982); Miller v. Aetna Life & Casualty co., 851 P.2d 1253 (June 1, 1993.).

The State of North Carolina absent a Search Warrant cannot impair the obligation of my Insurance Contract between me and my insurance company and all you cops can C your way out of this A & B conversation:
[1] The existence of an insurance policy is a matter of contract law, since insurance involves a contractual relationship between the insurer and the insured. LaPoint v. Richards, 66 Wn.

(2d) 585 at 588 (July 8, 1965); [2] Traditionally, insurance contracts have been considered to be private contracts between the parties. Mutual of Enumclaw v. Wiscomb, 611 P.2d 1304 (April 14, 1980).

For help, contact Luis Ewing at (360) 353-4846 or <rcwcodebuster@gmail.com> or <>. Please send CASH ONLY DONATIONS to: Luis Ewing, General Delivery, Copalis Crossing, Washington [98536]mailto:rcwcodebuster@comcast.netmailto:rcwcodebuster@gmail.com mailto:rcwcodebuster@yahoo.comhttp://www.truthradio.comhttp://www.republicbroa dcasting.comhttp://www.RBNLive.comhttp://www.FirstAmendmentRadio.comhttp://www.K ZFR.orghttp://www.VeritasRadio.comhttp://www.KZFR.orghttp://www.LuisEwing.comhttp ://www.theotherradionetwork.commailto:<rcwcodebuster@comcast.net>mailto:<rcwcodebu ster@yahoo.com>http://www.TruthRadio.comhttp://www.RBNLive.comhttp://www.Veritas Radio.com