Berger.Fan222
Member
Not at all. But I am not under the illusion gun owners are portrayed with the same fairness that is afforded to drivers and home owners. Are you?
Opinions on Conceal Carry Insurance
- Thread starter 98bluewave
- Start date
- Status
Not at all. But I am not under the illusion gun owners are portrayed with the same fairness that is afforded to drivers and home owners. Are you?
Just to clarify, the law is so broad that firms/practitioners specialize in particular areas. If the lawyer you have an on-going relationship with predominately works in real estate and taxation, then you don't want him/her as your attorney in a criminal case. But, they probably know someone they would want to defend them if they were accused fo the same crime you are now facing and that's the starting point for finding a defense counsel.
And you think TLS is hiring F. Lee Bailey?
What you get is the Texas A&M or Texas Tech graduate that couldn't get hired by a reputable firm in Austin, San Antonio, Dallas or Houston. Good luck trusting your life and liberty to him/her.
Remember two facts of life:
- The lawyer hired by the insurance company works for them, not you.
- If you hire your own attorney, they will probably NOT be paid for by your insurance.
Sebastian the Ibis
Member
Cannibul, If you beleive in your insurance so much, post a copy of the policy document - the actual contract that specifies when and what they will pay - not the glossy brochure. I'll bet it has laughably low benefits, and I can find exclusions for every realistic situation (like criminal charges).
Insurance companies make money by denying claims, not paying them. They will, at best, fulfill their contractual obligations for the lowest cost possible. This is not in your best interest.
I'd take my chances with a public defender with 100 trials under her belt, than the no experience lowest bidder who wants to take the low flat fee the insurance company will pay - and try to settle it as fast as possible with a plea deal. I have been involved with obtaining counsel for significant federal firearms/ attempted murder charges, and I have found the federal public defenders and conflict counsel to be superb. I have also recommended some of those folks for appointment to the bench. The prepaid attornies I have opposed have been a joke.
If you are concerned about workload, then you need to hire the attorney yourself.
Insurance companies make money by denying claims, not paying them. They will, at best, fulfill their contractual obligations for the lowest cost possible. This is not in your best interest.
I'd take my chances with a public defender with 100 trials under her belt, than the no experience lowest bidder who wants to take the low flat fee the insurance company will pay - and try to settle it as fast as possible with a plea deal. I have been involved with obtaining counsel for significant federal firearms/ attempted murder charges, and I have found the federal public defenders and conflict counsel to be superb. I have also recommended some of those folks for appointment to the bench. The prepaid attornies I have opposed have been a joke.
If you are concerned about workload, then you need to hire the attorney yourself.
Sebastian the Ibis
Member
Cannibul,
It looks like a judge certified a class action against Texas Law Shield:
https://www.thetrace.org/2015/08/texas-law-shield-concealed-carry-insurance-class-action-lawsuit/
There might be some answers for you there, if you want to understand how these programs work.
It looks like a judge certified a class action against Texas Law Shield:
https://www.thetrace.org/2015/08/texas-law-shield-concealed-carry-insurance-class-action-lawsuit/
There might be some answers for you there, if you want to understand how these programs work.
Evergreen
Member
Police have unions that help pay for their legal defense in these situations. Obviously, this is funded by your tax dollars. Could there be organizations that serve to protect conceal weapon carriers that people can join that could be organized and provide the same benefits? Many ask about the NRA, but the NRA is not the only game in town when it RKBA or 2A-oriented organizations. Many people do not like paying more than their yearly dues, but if there was some type of legal defense/ carrier insurance that members could fund, where all members pay a monthly due for the subscription, I would think it could possibly be a feasible solution. As well, they could network with attorneys and provide support on picking respectable attorneys who are specialized in handling cases of self-defense with firearms (or any potentially lethal weapon to be honest).
Police unions are not funded by tax dollars. They are funded by member dues and third party donations. Federal law prohibits employers from contributing money to unions.
Unions are a special type of association. They represent employees in their relationships with employers. They also fund, through a number of mechanisms, various employee benefits. Unions are subject to significant regulation under federal law.
However, what you suggest here is theoretically possible. It would not be a union. It would be a form of mutual protective or fraternal protective or fraternal benefit society (or association).
Such arrangements were, perhaps, more common in the past than today. Many have evolved into insurance companies. They were commonly used as a means of providing various medical or life insurance type benefits to members of a lodge or association. They tend to be regulated under state law much like insurance companies. Just for background, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners model law on fraternal benefit societies may be read here.
Similar types of arrangements have been set up by medical societies to fund malpractice defense and liabilities for physicians and certain other providers of medical care.
Setting something like this up for gun owners would involve roughly the following:
- The underlying organization would need to be set up. That would involve developing the necessary incorporation and governance documents -- articles of incorporation and by-laws. These would then be filed in whatever State is chosen as the organization's domicile.
- A plan of benefits would need to be designed and documented.
- The organization would need to decide in which States it wanted to operate. Then the laws of those States would need to be reviewed to determine if the organization would be subject to regulation in those State, and if so, decisions would need to be made regarding compliance and necessary filings with state regulators.
- those steps would, in some ways, be the easiest and most straightforward. But the real issue, and the one which should probably be addressed first, would be adequately funding operations. So --
- The organization would need to work out its business model, budgets and projected growth.
- The organization would also need to develop actuarial projections of the costs of providing benefits, probably out for the first ten years.
- The organization would need to project growth and decide how much it would need to charge to fund operations and benefits.
- The organization would also need to find a source of adequate start up funding.
- The organization will need an executable business plan to attract enough membership to cover costs and reserves and to recruit enough qualified lawyers to provide services.
- The organization would need to work out its business model, budgets and projected growth.
I suspect that some existing plans, like the USCCA plan, were probably developed in that sort of way.
My point is that while there are models for these sorts of arrangements, setting one up is a reasonably complex chore. There are a bunch of legal issues to be dealt with, and the arrangement will need to be adequately funded. It will also need grow sufficiently to generate enough income to cover costs and reserves.
Okay, I read through that link. First, the lawsuit is about their sales tactics of making deals with CHL instructors to pitch their product to gun owners. It isn't about the service itself though it might speak to the dependability of the people running it.
Second, the author includes some stuff at the end about how Texas Law Shield can deny coverage if they judge that it was a bad shoot. My question is which one of the other concealed carrier services or insurance carriers will cover you in the event of a bad shoot? My understanding is they all will drop you pretty fast. The only question to me is how and when they determine that. So I don't know what alternative would be suggested.
There's nothing new about high pressure selling and preying on people's fears. The car dealer's F&I guy has tried this on me every time I bought a car. I think there are two questions that will tell us all we need to know about Texas Law Shield. The first is how often have claims been made for their services. The second is have they provided effective legal representation as promised.
I heard a short talk by a lawyer that did work with Texas Law Shield. She is also on some of their youtube videos. She had one specific case she mentioned (no names) where a guy shot someone in self defense (non-fatal) then told the cops he was not in fear of his life or his girlfriend's life. She mentioned had to use some medical history for the guy to show a fist fight would cause severe injury to get the DA to drop it. From what she said, it was a good shoot, but he messed up when talking to the police. I am not sure where a case like that falls into place, but she said the guy didn't have to pay for her services and she said her typical fee for a case such as that is over $20,000.
I agree with the concern about the dependability of the services offered. In a case such as what happened to Zimmerman in Florida, would one of these companies stick with the case all the way through? If they did, it would go a long way to gaining respect from the LTC community.
I agree with the concern about the dependability of the services offered. In a case such as what happened to Zimmerman in Florida, would one of these companies stick with the case all the way through? If they did, it would go a long way to gaining respect from the LTC community.
Ghost In The Fog
Member
I have a personal email from CCW Safe that I would like to share, but I will not- it was to me and I feel it is confidential and without their permission I won't. I asked several questions of them on their contact us page on the website. I will relay what are a few of the facts that the sent me here in regards to this reply.
They hired National Trial Counsel Attorney Don West. Look up his relationship to the Zimmerman case.
I like CCW Safe- I feel good about the service they offer- They are also all former police officers. I like that. They also told me the have an average of 10 active cases a year.
As police officers, they have collectively worked thousands of crime scenes, hundreds of shooting cases, been sued in use of force cases, used deadly force, and some of them have been shot. They are not just a group of lawyers or magazine owners with a great idea to jump into the self-defense protection industry and make money off of our worst fears. Take your time to sift through the misinformation on the internet and be careful as to the marketing tricks of these products and their pushy sales tactics.
As I have said here before, ask questions. I had written a very lengthy email to them and had several very specific questions related to my needs. I did have to call to follow up on my email and understandably so, it took a little while to answer all of my questions but they did so quite satisfactorily.
I feel it is the best coverage and by far the most affordable. (They even explained why the prices are where they are) Ask and they will answer. It is a good service. I have been a member for 2 months now. In the short time I have been a member, I have not received ONE sales call or email for any kind of additional services/sales/promotions/magazines or training programs. They do put out an email training tips letter but NONE of it even offers options for additional services.I am 100% satisfied so far. I feel my phone conversations and email questions were answered open and honestly.
The service is certainly worth it to me.One I hope never to need.
Mousegun
Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2005
- Messages
- 738
OK -- he was acquitted.
Recently I have been looking hard into some sort of protection and reading this thread, many here don't really know what is and what is not covered. Most are NOT an insurance policy, they are a fund. You are a member of this fund and monies are drawn from the fund to pay cases. Long story short, the two that make sense to me are CCWSAFE and ACLDN with my gut leaning to CCWsafe. Those here that think they will go it alone and use personal funds to get a resolution better have very, very deep pockets. My best friend is a founding partner in a major law firm in the Twin Cities and he said it would be easy to burn through a 100K in your defense during a trial (criminal or civil) that eventually you were found innocent. For $130/yr. or less, this is a no brainer.
Last edited:
Cannondale26
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2018
- Messages
- 3
I have also been researching CCW insurance / legal plans for myself recently. A friend of mine has the Defender plan from CCW Safe without the civil liability coverage add-on.
if sued civilly, I'm curious whether CCW Safe would pay a highly experience attorney or a less expensive newbe to defend you as CCW Safe is NOT on the hook for any civil damages if they lose the case.
In my state of NC, we are free from civil liability. However, when traveling outside the state, there is no guarantee a person would find themselves in a civil liability friendly state if an incident occurred.
if sued civilly, I'm curious whether CCW Safe would pay a highly experience attorney or a less expensive newbe to defend you as CCW Safe is NOT on the hook for any civil damages if they lose the case.
In my state of NC, we are free from civil liability. However, when traveling outside the state, there is no guarantee a person would find themselves in a civil liability friendly state if an incident occurred.
That is a common misconception (applying in all States with self defense immunity laws) and not really true.
We discussed the subject generally in this thread: Civil Liability, Civil Immunity, and the Use of Force. But for example let's look at North Carolina law (G. S. 14-51.3, emphasis added):
So immunity attaches only if a person used force because he, "...reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another...." or he used force, "Under the circumstances permitted pursuant to G.S. 14-51.2." So --
- If the prosecutor (or a grand jury) concludes based on the evidence that there is probable cause to believe your intentional act of violence did not satisfy one of those conditions, you can be prosecuted for aggravated assault, voluntary manslaughter, or murder (depending on the circumstances and the outcome for the person you used force against). Then whether the prosecutor can meet his burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that your intentional act of violence did not satisfy one of those conditions will be decided in criminal court.
- If the person you used force against (or his surviving family) claims your intentional act of violence did not satisfy one of those conditions you can still be sued for civil damages. Then the question of whether your intentional act of violence satisfied the conditions necessary for immunity to attach will be decided in civil court. And if the person you used force against (or his surviving family) convinces a civil jury by a preponderance of the evidence that your intentional act of violence did not satisfy one of those conditions you can be held liable to pay civil damages.
- Note that under well established legal principles a prosecutor's decision not to pursue charges against you, or even your acquittal at a criminal trial, will not conclusively establish that your intentional act of violence was justified.
So the bottom line is that a self defense immunity law is not guaranteed to keep you out of court.
Sav .250
Member
FrogFurr noted in post #7, It`s more of a personal choice.
I see it that way as well. J s/n. Or put another. You would have peace of mind. If you so chose that route.
I see it that way as well. J s/n. Or put another. You would have peace of mind. If you so chose that route.
Cannondale26
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2018
- Messages
- 3
Well put Frank. To clarify my original comment of "In my state of NC, we are free from civil liability.", it was in the context of correctly choosing to use deadly force to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. However, that is not to say that a civil suit could not be brought against you in the even that a stray bullet caused property damage, injury or death to someone not directly involved in the original justified deadly force incident. In that context, my original question was "If sued civilly, I'm curious whether CCW Safe would pay a highly experience attorney or a less expensive newbe to defend you as CCW Safe is NOT on the hook for any civil damages if they lost the case.".
Feedback welcome.
You still don't get it.
You do not have the final say as to whether you correctly chose to use deadly force to prevent imminent death or great bodily injury. You do not have the final say as to whether your intentional act of violence against another human was legally justifiable. Those decisions will be made by others after the fact.
So if the prosecutor decides you did not correctly choose to use deadly force, so your intentional act of violence was not legally justifiable, that decision will be made in the criminal court. And if the person you shot, or his surviving relatives, belief that you did not correctly choose to use deadly force, so your intentional act of violence was not legally justifiable, that decision will be made in the civil court.
You might well think that you did everything right, but that doesn't mean that everyone will agree with you.
herrwalther
Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 8,127
My family lawyer is a prominent civil attorney that is on permanent retainer. With plans for a junior partner in his firm to be the family attorney when he goes. Having an attorney on standby is not a predisposition towards guilt in a lawsuit frenzy society we have become. When I slapped with a felony criminal charge, it still took months with a great lawyer to get cleared. Without my attorney I bet it would have taken much longer.
Cannondale26
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2018
- Messages
- 3
Thanks for your reply Frank. However, I believe I got it the first time. I fully understand that ANY use of deadly force with be judged in criminal court regardless of what the person who used deadly force thinks. If a person, who used deadly force, is found innocent, a civil suit may still be brought depending on the state.
This is where my CCW Safe civil defense question arose.
This is where my CCW Safe civil defense question arose.
- Status
