Carry Insurance

[old lady new shooter]

I have CCW Safe. They pay all the upfront costs upfront and depending how you configure your plan you can include $1MM coverage for civil suits, which is a Big Deal these days... a person can shoot someone and not be prosecuted criminally because it's ruled self-defense, but in many jurisdictions the family can still sue you. They also give a better price if you have a valid carry permit, as opposed to the "constitutional carry" option. ISTR there is also a home defense only plan for people who live in "may issue" jurisdictions but expect to defend their home with a firearm. I got the "defender" (licensed concealed carrier) plan with the civil liability add-on, total $399 per year. It's great peace of mind. A nice touch is that the membership card is digital and downloads directly into your phone's "wallet".

 

[D.B. Cooper]

I have CCW Safe. They pay all the upfront costs upfront and depending how you configure your plan you can include $1MM coverage for civil suits, which is a Big Deal these days... a person can shoot someone and not be prosecuted criminally because it's ruled self-defense, but in many jurisdictions the family can still sue you. They also give a better price if you have a valid carry permit, as opposed to the "constitutional carry" option. ISTR there is also a home defense only plan for people who live in "may issue" jurisdictions but expect to defend their home with a firearm. I got the "defender" (licensed concealed carrier) plan with the civil liability add-on, total $399 per year. It's great peace of mind. A nice touch is that the membership card is digital and downloads directly into your phone's "wallet".

My first thought was "Four hundred dollars!?" That's $1.10 per day. I spend more than that on snickers bars and cokes.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

So, here is a question. I was just looking at CCWSafe's website, and I noticed that all of their plans have the following restriction: "Will not cover the following...force that is not in self defense."

How and when do they make that determination? Do they look at the facts before taking the case and decide? (Seems to me that if they refused the case that would pretty damning.) Or, if you lose your case is it then "not in self defense" and you owe them for all the legal fees? What gives?

 

[Ru4real]

So, here is a question. I was just looking at CCWSafe's website, and I noticed that all of their plans have the following restriction: "Will not cover the following...force that is not in self defense."

How and when do they make that determination? Do they look at the facts before taking the case and decide? (Seems to me that if they refused the case that would pretty damning.) Or, if you lose your case is it then "not in self defense" and you owe them for all the legal fees? What gives?

In post #23, I was painting a cautionary tale about insurance. You’re questions show you’re thinking. If the court rules self defense, you most likely won’t need the insurance, but hey that’s when they cover! You are still liable for your actions, but it’ll be easy to win and also win a counter suit for legal costs, etc.

If the court rules NOT self defense, now you have a big liability problem and you don’t have any coverage to help you pay.

In post #22 you mention that Massad Ayoob and John Corriea think insurance is a good idea. Do you think maybe they have cash incentives to say that?

The bigger problem I see with insurance is the mind f**k it can give a person. “I’ll be ok if I pull my weapon and shoot because I have insurance.” Me, I want to be scared of pulling my gun because I know life will change and there is no coming back.

 

[Laphroaig]

So lets say the criminal court finds self defense, and you are not guilty of any crime. Then the deceased's family sues you in civil court. Does the insurance still protect you there?

 

[wiscoaster]

So lets say the criminal court finds self defense, and you are not guilty of any crime. Then the deceased's family sues you in civil court. Does the insurance still protect you there?

Regardless of yes or no, this is why you ALSO need personal liability insurance, available from most companies and agents that sell home owner's insurance.

 

[Craig_AR]

In post #22 you mention that Massad Ayoob and John Corriea think insurance is a good idea. Do you think maybe they have cash incentives to say that?

John Correia used to have CCWSafe as a sponsor, and also recommended it. More recently he changed sponsors and now has and is sponsored by Firearms Legal Protection, However, there is a distinction in saying he recommends having such coverage, and which specific program he recommends. I'd say consider his advice to have some appropriate coverage, and take into account his sponsor relationship with his current sponsor program.

I have never seen Massad Ayoob recommend a particular insurance program (although he may have). However, he is a Board Member for the Armed Citizen Legal Defense Network. ACLDN is a member support program of training and aftermath consulting, but is not an insurance program. As a key Board member, Ayoob is part of the process to decide whether a member's shooting event appears legitimately self-defense, and thus to get support from the Network.

 

[huntsman]

So lets say the criminal court finds self defense, and you are not guilty of any crime. Then the deceased's family sues you in civil court. Does the insurance still protect you there?

That’s an issue best solved by state legislature.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

In post #22 you mention that Massad Ayoob and John Corriea think insurance is a good idea. Do you think maybe they have cash incentives to say that?

Most certainly, and it's one of the things I hate about youtube. But that doesn't make the information outright false.

The bigger problem I see with insurance is the mind f**k it can give a person. “I’ll be ok if I pull my weapon and shoot because I have insurance.” Me, I want to be scared of pulling my gun because I know life will change and there is no coming back.

That's the economist's view of insurance-the idea that people drive more recklessly than they otherwise would because they have insurance. The same principle is applied to seat belts, airbags, etc.

I don't think it applies as easily to concealed carry because you still have those wild cards out there: the prosecutor who decides to charge, and the jury. You can have all the carry insurance in the world, but it may not keep you out of prison.

 

[old lady new shooter]

In post #23, I was painting a cautionary tale about insurance. You’re questions show you’re thinking. If the court rules self defense, you most likely won’t need the insurance, but hey that’s when they cover! You are still liable for your actions, but it’ll be easy to win and also win a counter suit for legal costs, etc.

Winning your self-defense case will require you to pay substantial legal fees UPFRONT. If you have several hundred thousand dollars sitting around you can use for this purpose, good for you.

 

[old lady new shooter]

So, here is a question. I was just looking at CCWSafe's website, and I noticed that all of their plans have the following restriction: "Will not cover the following...force that is not in self defense."

How and when do they make that determination? Do they look at the facts before taking the case and decide? (Seems to me that if they refused the case that would pretty damning.) Or, if you lose your case is it then "not in self defense" and you owe them for all the legal fees? What gives?

I have to confess that I missed that statement. I think their intention is that they don't want to cover murder, which in any case would be illegal for them to do. (Which could mean the statement is a CYA for them.) But your question about losing your case is a good one. It would be a great contribution here to write and ask them and post their response here.

 

[old lady new shooter]

So lets say the criminal court finds self defense, and you are not guilty of any crime. Then the deceased's family sues you in civil court. Does the insurance still protect you there?

That's the civil liability coverage CCW Safe offers. It's automatically included in their fanciest plan, but you can buy it as an add-on to at least the "defender" (licensed concealed carrier) plan that I got.

 

[wiscoaster]

....You are still liable for your actions, but it’ll be easy to win and also win a counter suit for legal costs, etc....

Not easy at all. Civil suits have a much lower barrier for the plaintiff to prove their case. Your success depends on your legal team's expertise and your legal team depends on your ability to finance their services. And forget the counter suit. Ain't going to happen. Somebody's going to be out big bucks, and better the insurance carrier than you.

 

[Ru4real]

Maybe so. Maybe not. Ultimately, it’s a personal choice to have insurance that may or may not help.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Maybe so. Maybe not. Ultimately, it’s a personal choice to have insurance that may or may not help.

Rittenhouse is the exception to the rule. He is, by now, famous (or infamous depending on your point of view). His legal team is working either pro bono (for free) or being funded by 2A groups. He is benefiting, to some extent, from the political chaos in the nation right now. Don't get me wrong; he is clearly innocent, but he wouldn't be getting all of this attention and assistance if he had simply shot someone trying to rob him on the street. That being said, I bet he already regrets going to that protest-even if he ultimately wins.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Rittenhouse is the exception to the rule. He is, by now, famous (or infamous depending on your point of view). His legal team is working either pro bono (for free) or being funded by 2A groups. He is benefiting, to some extent, from the political chaos in the nation right now. Don't get me wrong; he is clearly innocent, but he wouldn't be getting all of this attention and assistance if he had simply shot someone trying to rob him on the street. That being said, I bet he already regrets going to that protest-even if he ultimately wins.

The funds for his defense are being provided by a nonprofit which I think Lin Woods set up, https://fightback.law/. Here is a link to an article describing its founding: https://www.jsonline.com/story/news...l-lin-wood-raising-money-gofundme/5650147002/.

 

[gunguy56]

I bought into the USCCA program but really hope I never need it..but that reminds me of the old saying - It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6....

 

[toivo]

Rittenhouse is the exception to the rule. He is, by now, famous (or infamous depending on your point of view). His legal team is working either pro bono (for free) or being funded by 2A groups. He is benefiting, to some extent, from the political chaos in the nation right now. Don't get me wrong; he is clearly innocent, but he wouldn't be getting all of this attention and assistance if he had simply shot someone trying to rob him on the street. That being said, I bet he already regrets going to that protest-even if he ultimately wins.

I'm not a lawyer -- or an insurance agent -- but I'm wondering if carry insurance would have helped Rittenhouse. For starters, he was 17 at the time of the shooting, and I doubt that any insurer would have sold him a policy. And even if they had, he was a minor in illegal possession under Wisconsin law when the shooting happened. If I were a claims adjuster, I would jump on that like a duck on a junebug.

 

[wiscoaster]

...but I'm wondering if carry insurance would have helped Rittenhouse. ...

Not likely. Any deviation from a policy term is an excuse for an insurance carrier to deny a claim.

 

[F-111 John]

I have never seen Massad Ayoob recommend a particular insurance program (although he may have). However, he is a Board Member for the Armed Citizen Legal Defense Network. ACLDN is a member support program of training and aftermath consulting, but is not an insurance program. As a key Board member, Ayoob is part of the process to decide whether a member's shooting event appears legitimately self-defense, and thus to get support from the Network.

Armed Citizen Legal Defense Network is not an insurance program, (although they are currently fighting a Cease and Desist order from the Washington State Insurance Commission who asserts that ACLDN is selling insurance,) but ACLDN does provide financial support to pay legal costs and arrange for bail of its members to defend against criminal charges arising from a self defense action. They will also provide financial support against civil suits, but will not pay any judgement. That is where your homeowner's Liability rider comes in.

 

[k_dawg]

My wife and I have USCCA. The local attorney who I would pick anyways, is listed with them.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

It doesn't matter you carry or not. If you have assets, get a following umbrella policy for 2, 5 or 10 million.
It doesn't cost very much.

 

[Blackbeard 44]

I have been following this thread from the beginning, I live in Washington and have always wanted to get some sort of carry insurance, I have been discouraged by our insurance comminisher and wonder if having this type of coverage could be used against you in court.

 

[wiscoaster]

.... wonder if having this type of coverage could be used against you in court.

Well, ya, if you're the perp.

 

[Blackbeard 44]

as much as handloaded ammo could be turned around against you, I think having carry insurance could easily be used by the prosecution to try and get a conviction