Insurance and Your CCW

[BigO01]

It seems my "grey Matter" is working a bit of overtime today so I pose another question for you folks here .

Now I am not speaking of special insurance such as Liability while carrying a weapon as some places have , I am speaking of your personal health and life insurance .

I know for a fact that there have been clauses that specify that should I die while participating in certain activities my life insurance is null and void . Activities such as Sky diving , race car driving , committing a felony and even War or military service .

As we see more states pass CCW laws it is only a matter of time that a armed citizen is killed in a conflict with a criminal .

What if Insurance Companies began excluding your coverage if you interjected yourself into a situation that you could have avoided such as another person being mugged , raped , robbed .

I see it as a possibility actually if it happens often enough .

Now lets try to get beyond what I call "Me and my big bad 45" syndrome , where you think you and your custom built $3,000 1911 , are invincible , and try to think in the real world . As in if you get killed can your family survive without your income , What if there is a clause in your homeowners , "you know where normally if you die the house gets paid off" and your wife and kids get stuck with a huge payment that she doesn't even begin to make enough money to pay without your income .

Living in the real world isn't as much fun as being an internet Commando I know but most of us at least make a stabbing attempt at it .

 

[sacp81170a]

Setting aside the insults to CCW holders in your post, both real and implied, why shouldn't an insurance company charge you more if you're unprepared to protect yourself from criminal violence? They already base part of your home insurance rate on whether you take other precautions like having fire extinguishers, smoke alarms, and dead bolts on your doors. If you take a defensive driving course, some companies offer a discount on your car insurance. After all, carrying a firearm reduces your risk of harm from criminal violence, much like wearing a seat belt while driving and having air bags in your car reduces the risk of harm from a vehicle accident. It's not a risk taking behavior, it's a risk reducing behavior. If it didn't reduce risk, why would I as a law enforcement officer carry a firearm while on duty? (Gee, guess I'm not a keyboard commando. )

As we see more states pass CCW laws it is only a matter of time that a armed citizen is killed in a conflict with a criminal .

It's already happened, and the guy in Texas who was killed while attempting to protect others is rightly lauded as a hero. One of the people whose life he saved (can't remember the exact details, but there were several threads on the subject here) admitted that he would have been killed had the armed citizen not intervened. That said, these kinds of incidents haven't been common enough to show up in actuarial tables.

Pardon me for saying so, but you sound an awful lot like a troll...

 

[Valkman]

Now lets try to get beyond what I call "Me and my big bad 45" syndrome , where you think you and your custom built $3,000 1911 , are invincible , and try to think in the real world . As in if you get killed can your family survive without your income , What if there is a clause in your homeowners , "you know where normally if you die the house gets paid off" and your wife and kids get stuck with a huge payment that she doesn't even begin to make enough money to pay without your income .

Living in the real world isn't as much fun as being an internet Commando I know but most of us at least make a stabbing attempt at it .

That was real cute insulting all the CCW holders - do you even have one? As to your question, I could care less about answering it with the rest you put in there.

Man in less than 3 months and 21 posts you really figured it out. Not.

 

[AndyC]

I don't think Big001's a troll at all, and I don't think he's insulted anyone - I don't feel insulted, anyway.

The question he asked was "What if Insurance Companies began excluding your coverage if you interjected yourself into a situation that you could have avoided such as another person being mugged , raped , robbed ."

He wasn't talking about risk-reduction - more like "I've got a firearm and I can try to save others because I'm armed and (hopefully) know what I'm doing". In other words, deliberately putting himself in harms' way, about which I'm sure insurance companies would have a stroke, especially if he was killed or wounded in the attempt.

Personally, I feel it's a bloody good question and I'd like to get some clarification on it. Insurance companies will do anything to wiggle out of paying up by saying "Oh, he didn't tell us he was willing to take a higher risk due to XYZ factors, therefore we're not paying."

Any insurance-reps here that can clear this up?

 

[CraigJS]

+++ Andy and Big. Sad but true, we do have to think about this possibility! If an insurance company could save money, do you really believe they won't try to do just that? Good post Big and no insult taken here. IMHO it is much more useful than another "what if this happens" post. You don't need 1000 post to be able to say something of value!

 

[BullfrogKen]

BigO01 said: where you think you and your custom built $3,000 1911 , are invincible , and try to think in the real world .

I thought I was invunerable . . .


Read your insurance Ts & Cs. Life insurance usually excludes a death benefit when committing a felony. It would be a stretch for the insurance industry to begin excluding coverage for legal acts.

Just read your insurance policy.

BigO01 said: Living in the real world isn't as much fun as being an internet Commando I know but most of us at least make a stabbing attempt at it .

This is a bit antagonistic.

 

[Jeff White]

I don't see insurance carriers raising your rates because you have a CCW permit. After all, you have no legal obligation to act. So I don't see how that makes you a bigger risk.

The one possible exception I see is liability insurance. You may find yourself involved in an excessive force/wrongful death type suit like police officers face.

The insurance companies are in business to make money. They can't make much money if they don't write coverage.

Jeff

 

[BigO01]

AndyC and CraigJS thank you for getting it , as for the rest of you if there is an insut in there it isn't directed at a mature adult with a CCW it is directed at the kids or those that think like kids and think that blasting away in every situation is going to be the answer . Tell me you haven't read posts by people , while you sat there shaking you head and thought to yourself this has to be some overhormonel 16 year old ?

This part "I know but most of us at least make a stabbing attempt at it ." is direct at and intended to describe all of you who are insulted as the Mature adults that are NOT the internet Commandos I am refering to .

Do you get it now ?

BullfrogKen they already do exclude coverage for legal activities Sky diving is legal as is driving a race car but in every policy I have ever had they nullify your coverage , and I think the phrase "Act of War" is in there also so if we get bombed your insurance company wont pay .

Jeff I'm not talking about simply raising rates I am speaking of a clause that excludes coverage all together such as the examples I listed .

Yes Insurance companies are in it to make money and life insurance is one of the most profitable things they sell because most policies are term life , in other words you have coverage until it expires after a fixed amount of time .

How much would it cut into their profits if 100 CCW holders get killed and they pay out say $100,000 per policy per year ? They would make some changes , I would bet on it .

sacp81170a in your post you state this has happened and they guy was lauded as a hero , thats all well and good , but did he have a wife and minor children who are now struggling financialy because he isn't there to provide for them ? Thats what this is about not just using your gun but protecting your family from a financial disaster .

Insurance companies can change the rules anytime they wish after all it is their ball and they can take it and go home anytime they want and you can't play as they say .

The question here is if this would happen , as a CCW holder how would you modify you behavior to protect yourself ? Would you buy a protective vest ? Get more training ? Carry a reload ? Backup handgun ? Larger Cap magazine/gun ? Avoid situations if your life wasn't in danger ? Get a group together and start an insurance company ? What ? Think , think think , your brain is suppose to be your best weapon .

I honstly thought my post was very clear , and realy don't see how so many of you are insulted . If something this benign clouds your judgement and comprehension you realy need to get some training/help , because I fear if some punk starts calling you a few 4 letter words you'll simply fly off the handle and rush into a situation without understanding it and get yourselves killed .

Be safe and have a long and happy life .

 

[sacp81170a]

I honstly thought my post was very clear , and realy don't see how so many of you are insulted .

It may help to think of this forum as print media rather than as a conversation. When you type something like

"Me and my big bad 45" syndrome

there is no way to gauge whether you're joking, serious, or somewhere in between. We have no way to judge the tone of your posts other than what you write, except for some emoticons if you include them. Even at that, it's difficult enough to express precisely what you mean in print, and lots of folks will misread it anyway. (No, that *never* happens. )

Be that as it may,

sacp81170a in your post you state this has happened and they guy was lauded as a hero , thats all well and good , but did he have a wife and minor children who are now struggling financialy because he isn't there to provide for them ? Thats what this is about not just using your gun but protecting your family from a financial disaster .

You completely ignore all the other points in *my* post. It's up to individual judgement, but I teach in my CCW classes that the firearm is for *your* (and your loved ones) protection, not someone else's. Carrying a firearm is a risk reduction behavior. I would submit that if you're prone to

interjected yourself into a situation that you could have avoided

you may want to reconsider carrying a firearm.

If you've been reading this forum for very long, you will notice that there are plenty of knowledgeable folks who have debated these very questions, just as there are lots of trolls who have come and gone. I have seen many inflammatory posts here by folks who weren't here to learn, just to stir the pot. Time will tell, but by replying in the manner you did at least you prove yourself not to be a "drive-by" poster. Pull up a chair, get used to having your ideas challenged in a reasonable manner, and contribute to the discussion. That's what THR is here for.

 

[Manedwolf]

As we see more states pass CCW laws it is only a matter of time that a armed citizen is killed in a conflict with a criminal .

Like criminals don't kill UNARMED citizens every single day?

What's better, being an unarmed definite victim, or having a fighting chance to survive?

 

[pcf]

Why would an insurance company risk losing a paying customer for an event that has no statistical value? CCW holder deaths relating to self defense or defense of a third party is what percent of 300,000,000 Americans?

I'm willing to wager that you have a better chance of dying from lightning, about 60 deaths per year, (0.00002%) than CCW related activity.

 

[MGK]

Big oo1

With the way the world is today, I would have to believe that if you lost your life trying to save another, you would also be forfeiting your life insurance. I am sure it would end up in court. To take offensive action, you risk much, make sure it is worth the risk!

MGK

 

[spacemanspiff]

Insurance companies can change the rules anytime they wish after all it is their ball and they can take it and go home anytime they want and you can't play as they say .

not necessarily true. changes to coverages and exclusions added typically have to be approved by the state division of insurance. so does rate increases. these must be justified. companies must prove there is valid reason for the adoption of more restrictive wording/coverages.

i can't comment much about personal lines of coverage, such as life/health, but commercially speaking on a General liability policy, there is an exception that provides coverage for the reasonable protection of life/property. it is most likely left intentionally vague enough so that an adjustor will be one who determines if the use of deadly force was 'reasonable' and that harm/injury/death was imminent if no action was taken.
in other words, when a disgruntled ex-employee comes storming in to the office and points a gun at the boss, when i (more like 'if') draw down and stop the threat, my companys general liability policy can help protect me in the event the ex-employee or their family sues me.
at least, taht is the theory. i have yet to see it ever come to fruition and in all honesty i dont want to ever see it.

 

[AndyC]

I dunno - I'm real wary of insurance companies in general and wouldn't put anything past them in their efforts to avoid paying a claimant.

Then again, I moved here from a country where by law an insurance company doesn't have to tell you why they denied a claim, so perhaps I'm just overly paranoid

 

[BullfrogKen]

BigO01 said: BullfrogKen they already do exclude coverage for legal activities Sky diving is legal as is driving a race car but in every policy I have ever had they nullify your coverage , and I think the phrase "Act of War" is in there also so if we get bombed your insurance company wont pay .

Well, my next door neighbors race stock cars every weekend, and they buy track insurance. I guess specified risk behaviors can be excluded, but those activities often have their own insurance policies for those that do them.

Seeing as how a smoker can still buy insurance, I think I'll expect to see a denial for smoking cigars before I see one for carrying a gun.

BigO01 said: The question here is if this would happen , as a CCW holder how would you modify you behavior to protect yourself ? Would you buy a protective vest ? Get more training ? Carry a reload ? Backup handgun ? Larger Cap magazine/gun ? Avoid situations if your life wasn't in danger ? Get a group together and start an insurance company ? What ? .

I thought the act of carrying an adequate means of self defense served to help mitigate the risk to my family. I guess I'll just continue to get along the way men did for thousands of years before we had such things as insurance. And if not, that's life. Bankruptcy has its place. I'll not fret over things I have no control.

BigO01 said: Think , think think , your brain is suppose to be your best weapon .

Admonishing me to "think, think, think" to solve something you perceive as a problem? OK, that is pretty abrasive.


As far as "flying off the handle" over either some punk's insults, or this boorishness, you shouldn't worry about it. I ignore both equally well.