Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network, LLC

[JellyJar]

Does anyone have any opinions about the Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network, LLC? Do you think it would be worth joining at $85.00 a year or $225.00 for three years?

 

[cbrgator]

I've never heard of it. What do they use your $85 for? Is it an advocacy group?

 

[Shadow 7D]

I believe that it's more than just an advocacy work I think they can also help out with legal advice

 

[Fred Fuller]

I can't speak for anyone else here or for THR, but it's worth it to us. My wife and I will soon pay our dues for a second year's membership.

lpl
==========

http://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/

From the website -

Do You Worry About the Aftermath of a Self-Defense Shooting?
The Network’s goal is to prevent miscarriages of justice through—

Educating members about the legalities of using deadly force for self defense and how to interact with the criminal justice system after a shooting.

A fee deposit paid to the member's attorney by the Network if the member has been involved in a self-defense incident. The fee deposit gets the legal defense immediately underway, with representation during questioning, and arranging for an independent investigation of the incident. If the incident results in felony charges the fee deposit is $10,000; if the member faces misdemeanor charges, a $5,000 fee deposit is sent to his or her attorney.

Network members are also eligible for additional grants of financial assistance from the Network's legal defense fund if they face unmeritorious prosecution or civil action after a self-defense incident occurring during their period of membership.

The Network publishes a monthly journal online with columns and features focused on topics of interest to armed citizens. Click here for links to the latest edition as well as an archive of earlier journals, which are delivered as PDFs.
Creating a nationwide network of attorneys and legal experts which the member can draw upon in the event of a self-defense shooting.

If you possess a gun for defense of yourself and your family, we urge you to seriously consider joining the Network.

Preparation to survive the second attack—the legal aftermath of a justifiable defense shooting—is critical.

Ignore it at your own peril.
=snip=

 

[riseagainstforme]

Any one have first hand experience using this defense network? I wanna join but am a bit hesitant.

 

[Frank Ettin]

My wife and I have both been members for several years now, and not long ago we renewed again.

Fortunately, we haven't had to call upon their services, and I consider that a very good thing. However, I've read things he's written and have formed a good opinion of him and his understanding of the issues based on that. Also, good people like Massad Ayoob are involved.

 

[mfcmb]

I think it's great. I started with one year, then re-joined for three. They're good people, providing an unique and beneficial service to citizens who carry firearms for self defense.

 

[lima_w]

When I return to the CONUS and have the ability to carry and RKBA, I'll be paying for a membership. Especially in strong anti-2A states, it could really prove to be worth the money if you ever had to defend yourself or your family

 

[bratch]

Any one have first hand experience using this defense network? I wanna join but am a bit hesitant.

They have only had one member involved in a shooting to date.

 

[dirtykid]

bratch is that a bad thing ? (meaning they dont have experience) ?? My spousal-unit works for a district-court judge so i can stop in to her work for lunch with her and "chat" with up to 5-local judges at one-time (3 of which are pro-gun/2-carrying) so im not likely to pay for some attorneys advice, I dont particularly care for lawyer's as i've seen some shady-characters get set free because of some B-* technicallity,,but i guess that's justice right ?

 

[Good&Fruity]

They only pay up to 10K? That's not much, especially for such steep fees. A murder or manslaughter case can cost MUCH MUCH more....

 

[bratch]

bratch is that a bad thing ? (meaning they dont have experience) ??

Not at all.

I read the original question asking if anyone had first had experience using the ACDL; I assumed they were implying using them for assistance in defense of a shooting. My statement was made since there is only one person in the country who would have first hand experience.

They only pay up to 10K? That's not much, especially for such steep fees. A murder or manslaughter case can cost MUCH MUCH more....

If they were to pay for the entire defense the funds would be depleated pretty quickly. On top of the you can get access to expert witness and members only material.

*I am not a member, I have been planning on joining for a while now and actually won a membership last week but haven't sent it in yet.

 

[cbrgator]

So this is basically a type of insurance, more or less? That's what I am gathering.

 

[leadcounsel]

Tagged for later. Interesting concept. Unsure if it's money well spent or not... Going to research.

 

[SurgicalGloves88]

It seems like the prosecution could say you had a preconcieved notion to pull your weapon and shoot just for having this insurance as a what if. A person involved in a self defense shoot out should have no problem proving his or her intent, or the fact that it was indeed self defense. We all have clean records you must to have a ccw. Being a law abiding citizen who went out if their way to carry a firearm legally should go a long way in a defense case. We aren't criminals who just pack our metal with no regard for laws or authority. We are fathers and mothers, Americans who exercise their right to protect themselves. I don't think I need insurance I have a cool temperament and I trust in my judgment and in God. If the unthinkable happens and i am forced to discharge my weapon than I have complete faith that a judgment will rule in self defense.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

SurgicalGloves, you should read the Larry Hickey case in this same forum. It will help give you a better idea of how the legal system works.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...A person involved in a self defense shoot out should have no problem proving his or her intent, or the fact that it was indeed self defense. ... Being a law abiding citizen who went out if their way to carry a firearm legally should go a long way in a defense case. We aren't criminals who just pack our metal with no regard for laws or authority. We are fathers and mothers, Americans who exercise their right to protect themselves. I don't think I need insurance I have a cool temperament and I trust in my judgment and in God....

I'm afraid you're a little naive.

Yes, often justification is clear. But sometimes it is not. For some examples of what can happen, see the cases of --

Larry Hickey, a good family man in gun friendly Arizona who thought he was justified. He was arrested, spent 71 days in jail, went through two different trials ending in hung juries, was forced to move from his house, etc., before the DA decided it was a good shoot and dismissed the charges.

Mark Abshire in Oaklahoma thought he was justified. Nonetheless, despite this happening on his own lawn in a fairly gun-friendly state with a "Stand Your Ground" law, he was arrested, went to jail, charged, lost his job and his house, and spent two and a half years in the legal grinder before finally being acquitted.

Harold Fish, a retired school teacher and father or seven, also in gun friendly Arizona, thought he was justified. But he was still convicted and sent to prison. He won his appeal, his conviction was overturned, and a new trial was ordered. The DA chose to dismiss the charges rather than retry Mr. Fish.

For a discussion of how a plea of self defense works in court, see this post.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by SurgicalGloves88: A person involved in a self defense shoot out should have no problem proving his or her intent, or the fact that it was indeed self defense.

Well, sure, if (1) the person did indeed act lawfully in all aspects of the incident, (2) the person can provide sufficient evidence showing that he acted lawfully, and the state does not have much evidence to the contrary.

We all have clean records you must to have a ccw. Being a law abiding citizen who went out if their way to carry a firearm legally should go a long way in a defense case.

That one has not been convicted of a prior crime has nothing at all to do whether a later action was lawful.

... I trust in my judgment and in God. If the unthinkable happens and i am forced to discharge my weapon than I have complete faith that a judgment will rule in self defense.

And it probably will, provided that your action was lawful and you can produce evidence to that effect.

But--unless the evidence at the scene is entirely clear and supportive of your position, and unless the charging authorities so conclude, you will need a competent attorney, and that will cost a great deal of money.

 

[Frank Ettin]

... I trust in my judgment and in God. If the unthinkable happens and i am forced to discharge my weapon than I have complete faith that a judgment will rule in self defense....

And it probably will, provided that your action was lawful and you can produce evidence to that effect

But--unless the evidence at the scene is entirely clear and supportive of your position, and unless the charging authorities so conclude, you will need a competent attorney, and that will cost a great deal of money.

I think it's important for us to remember, and occasionally remind ourselves, that if we are forced to shoot someone in what we believe to be self defense, we have, nonetheless, intentionally committed an act of extreme violence on another human being. And our society, and its laws, take a very dim view of one person intentionally causing physical injury to another. Our laws do recognize that at times doing so may be justified, but unless and until justification is established, intentionally hurting someone will be viewed as a serious, criminal act and investigated and dealt with accordingly.

 

[SurgicalGloves88]

Wow! I think that's the definition of getting schooled. Of course i read everything in a thread before i give my thoughts. To do otherwise would have be foolish. I respect your responses, and read them with an open mind. I agree that the system of laws we live under moves slow. On occasion somebody will get caught in the cracks of the bureaucracy and media frenzy that comes with it. Whether you agree with me or not, it's ok. I just think that having insurance like this could get twisted around in court, and I hold true to the belief that the truth will always come out. Even if it takes 71 days.

 

[SurgicalGloves88]

I would like to know how people in criminal justice feel about this insurance. Both officers of the law and lawyers alike.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

They only pay up to 10K? That's not much, especially for such steep fees.

At $85 a year, you'd have to be a member for 117 years before you paid in more than they are offering to pay out. While I agree that it could easily be a drop in the bucket compared to the costs of a Larry-Hickey/Mark Abshire style case, I think that is a pretty good return on investment. And I think the access to experts and lawyers who are knowledgable about real self-defense cases (as opposed to the much more common "I shot him over that bag of dope in self-defense and then took all the drugs and money" argument that most criminal defense lawyers hear) is quite a value in its own right.

Of course part of that depends on how likely the risk is that you will be involved in a self-defense shooting and need their help - and that risk assessment is going to vary a lot for each individual.

All in all, it is something that I would like to be a part of for myself and my family; but I haven't done that yet. In part because I assess our personal risk as low and I've always got other things that need attention as well. So I guess you'd say that I think it is a good idea; but I haven't actually started following my own advice yet.

 

[Frank Ettin]

I would like to know how people in criminal justice feel about this insurance. Both officers of the law and lawyers alike.

I'm a lawyer -- retired now after having practiced for over 30 years.

I signed both myself and my wife up two years ago.

Does that help answer your question?

 

[cbrgator]

What is the quality of the services they provide? Who are the attorneys and how are they vetted?

 

[altitude_19]

I'd like to see this resurrected if we can. Thinking about buying in myself. Had to mace a dog yesterday, and was a 1/2 second from shooting him. Got me pondering all the "if"s.
I'm guessing the way this works is they have vetted defense lawyers in most major cities and can point you there way/provide funding. Is that accurate?