Talk:1996 Padilla car crash

Accuracy
I question the accuracy of much of this article. The vast majority of the claims seem to have only one source. I know I was stationed on Okinawa in the 1980's, and insurance was required even then. Mushrom (talk) 22:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Then how was Padilla allowed to drive without insurance? -- Esemono (talk) 23:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I was stationed in Okinawa from 2005 to 2008 and we were required to have car insurance. The guards at the gates do random checks. As for the author of the source that is cited, do you believe everything you read? Bunns USMC (talk)

I was on Okinawa since 1992 and the requirement for US servicemembers to carry additional auto liability insurance goes back at least that far. Let me explain: Japanese law requires a very small portion of liability insurance to be purchased in conjunction with inspection. This is called JCI (Japanese compulsory insurance). This is all that is required by Japanese law. Many Okinawans do not carry more than this. The US Military has policy that requires servicemembers in Japan to carry an additional policy on top of this. This goes back to at least 1992 that I know of, but I suspect much further. Most refer to this as "American insurance". Around the time of the Padilla incident (1996) and the Eskridge incident (1998) the military doubled the coverage requirements for this insurance to help pay the ever increasing demands from Okinawan victims. FGR01 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.27.1.18 (talk) 20:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I was in Okinawa as well (from 2005 to 2008) and all US service members were REQUIRED to have insurance. Some commands even check their junior enlisted to make sure they have insurance. However, that doesn't mean there aren't cases where the individual let their insurance lapse and weren't caught. Which is probably the answer to the question "why was she allowed to drive without insurance?". Just like the police can't catch everyone to drives without insurance in the states, the same can be said for military members stationed overseas, and even Japanese nationals are guilty of the same thing.SquallyZ06 (talk) 03:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Blood Money
Why is the term "blood money" invoked? Sounds like an NPOV issue here, the writer suggesting, inadvertently or otherwise, that the litigation had an onerous or vindictive quality. Otherwise, if a specific newspaper article referred to the litigation as "seeking blood money", then this should be noted in the main text of the article. versen (talk) 02:53, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The source used the term "solatium" but since its a little used legal term, blood money was included. In Japanese culture there is a tradition of offering Blood money to the victims family. -- Esemono (talk) 03:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

The Japanese word is isyaryou and is often called "gomen money"SquallyZ06 (talk) 03:27, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

BLP1E
This article is a classic case of WP:BLP1E so I'm moving the article to a new title about the event. For now I'm using 1996 Padilla car accident. Other suggestions for a better name are welcome. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 18:41, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Y car
Note: American "Military-owned" vehicles do have license plates which start with the letter "Y" that sets them apart from the Japanese owned cars. These plates can be traced to the owners through the military police where they must be registered.
 * When did this start? -- Esemono (talk) 09:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I was on Okinawa in 1992 and the requirement for Y plates on US Servicemember owned vehicles goes back at least that far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.27.1.18 (talk) 20:45, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

License Plates and Insurance.
Hey gents, I removed the sentences regarding license plates and insurance not being required. I am searching for a reference regarding insurance requirements. Bunns 1775 (talk) 14:12, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I found this link which briefly talks about insurance, nothing major but at least it's something. Bunns 1775 (talk) 14:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That is for the Marines and it present day. It doesn't say anything about when the accident happened. -- Esemono (talk) 15:01, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I found this link concerning auto insurance. It states beginning Jan 97 US Service Members would be required to have supplemental auto insurance, which common sense tells us that in order to get supplemental auto insurance, you need to already have primary auto insurance.  Will this please you enough so we can remove the blatanly incorrect information on these articles?  By the way the Marine commander is the senior commander on Okinawa, meaning he has authority over all services. --  Bunns 1775 (talk) 16:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As shown by the title of the article the accident happened in 1996 before the requirement was supposedly enforced. -- Esemono (talk) 23:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * This article is still incorrect. There were still requirements for insurance and license plates prior to 1997.  We have enough military editors that have served in Okinawa that can verify that.  Once I find a written reference to that effect I will be changing this article.Bunns 1775 (talk) 11:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I found this article stating that Japanese Compulsory Auto Insurance was adopted in 1956, and this which was signed in 1960, which states "Privately owned vehicles of members of the United States Armed Forces, the civilian component, and their dependents shall carry Japanese number plates to be acquired under the same conditions as those applicable to Japanese nationals." Bunns 1775 (talk) 12:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Your first article states that Japan adopted compulsory insurance, nothing about Americans being forced to take out insurance indeed if that was true why didn't Padilla have car insurance? Americans in Japan live by a separate parallel system of laws which is why Okinawans protest so much about their presence.  -- Esemono (talk) 13:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Because not everyone obeys the law. Were you present when these incidents happen.  I have given 2 seperate references that show both license plates and insurance  were required before these incidents.  yet you still state in the article that insurance wasn't required untill 1997.  I was stationed in Okinawa.  We abide by the same laws they do.  We are required to get the compulsory auto insurance, in addition we are required to get supplemental insurance, and it can get expensive. I will compromise with you, I can live with the article as is if you can.Bunns 1775 (talk) 14:45, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That may be TRUE but Wikiepedia isn't about truth its about Verifiability. You gave me a link that said it wasn't till 1997 that American's were required to buy Insurance.  This link, that you provided, directly contradicts your statement that Americans had to have insurance.  Why would the Americans sign a treaty that forced their members to buy insurance if they were already forced to buy insurance since 1956?  The other link is about Japanese who were forced to buy insurance.  It has nothing about whether Americans troops were forced to buy insurance as Americans are covered by a different set of laws as per the SOFA. -- Esemono (talk) 21:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Just for the sake of propriety and the record, please note the discussion of some of these issues which took place on my user talk page. —  T RANSPORTER M AN  ( TALK ) 20:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC) (Now set out below. —  T RANSPORTER M AN   ( TALK ) 13:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC))