Question on legal insurance for gun owners
- Thread starter N9NWO
- Start date
- Status
CoalCrackerAl
Member
We all have US Law shield. We have the base coverage plus the bail and expert witness.
herrwalther
Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 8,130
wiscoaster
Member
I have CCW Safe and will probably overlay with USCCA in the new year. I think some kind of legal liability insurance coverage is a must for responsible gun owners, but I wouldn't advocate it as a legally mandated requirement, as has been introduced as legislation in some states.
Airborne Falcon
Member
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,685
I have CCWSafe.
CodeSection
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2011
- Messages
- 251
For several, several years, I have had both CCW Safe for unlimited legal representation and USCCA really for their $2,000,000 civil liability coverage. In the past, USCCA limited their legal costs to be part of that $2,000,000.....that changed on November 1st when they announced unlimited legal representation. They stated their insurance carrier now covers unlimited legal representation. USCCA has decided to try to increase its market share by encouraging CCW Safe subscribers to switch to them.....
I still intend to keep both. I prefer if ever needed, to deal with a knowledgeable and experienced team of criminal attorneys, not just any attorney that signs up to their subscription model like USCCA have. CCW Safe has vetted experienced criminal defense attorneys. In addition, I prefer to deal with a company that has criminal attorneys that will represent you even on an appeal. I'm not sure the underlying insurance company that USCCA uses will pay for any appeal representation. My impression (right or wrong) is that many times insurance companies settle on issues based upon limiting costs to their insurance company. I would hate such an action taken in a self-defense situation......
My suggestion is to do your research and actually read the various company's agreements in order to make an informed decision.
Good luck!
I still intend to keep both. I prefer if ever needed, to deal with a knowledgeable and experienced team of criminal attorneys, not just any attorney that signs up to their subscription model like USCCA have. CCW Safe has vetted experienced criminal defense attorneys. In addition, I prefer to deal with a company that has criminal attorneys that will represent you even on an appeal. I'm not sure the underlying insurance company that USCCA uses will pay for any appeal representation. My impression (right or wrong) is that many times insurance companies settle on issues based upon limiting costs to their insurance company. I would hate such an action taken in a self-defense situation......
My suggestion is to do your research and actually read the various company's agreements in order to make an informed decision.
Good luck!
Tenncvol
Member
In the legal system, frequently the process is the punishment. Successfully defend yourself physically with a handgun, win the court cases, criminal and civil, and now enjoy starting over financially with a re-financed house and a . depleted IRA plan. For the price of a mid-level handgun, a number of legal self defense services are available for consideration.
AlexanderA
Member
These are actually prepaid legal services plans rather than true insurance. True insurance (liability insurance) would pay the judgement against you. But even that would not cover "intentional acts."
1942bull
Member
I have CCW Safe. Unlike most other programs it is not underwritten by an insurance company. It is a contractual.business arrangement. So the usual term and conditions that insurers use to limit or dent coverage are not in the CCW Safe contract. It is imperative that you read the insurance policy and not rely on marketing hype. The hype sells you but the policy governs. CCW Safe has it contract online at its website. It is quite clear. Another issue is that o recovery. If you are convicted it means you committed a crime, and that can be a way I’d seeing to recover what the insurer paid out. Also look to see if sn appeal is covered. If you are convicted you will want to appeal. Make sure whatever you get covers an appeal. Once again, do not rely on the marketing materials. Read the policy or contract.
1942bull
Member
Following up on my last post looked up the USCCA policy and the CCW Service Agreement. I selected a definition for act of self defense. The definitions of each are:
CCW Safe
A “Recognized Self-Defense Use of Force Incident” is an incident where force is used pursuant to a reasonable belief that use of deadly force is necessary to protect from imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. This includes any necessary force with all legal weapons and physical force to defend against a life-threatening attack in self-defense.
USCCA
“Act of self-defense” means the act of defending one’s person or others against an unlawful, unprovoked, and imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm by an aggressor, but only if:
1. any force used is both reasonable under the circumstances and proportionate to the threat; and
2. the act is permitted by applicable law.
The the subtle difference is that CCW covers any necessary force while USCCA requires the force be reasonable and proportionate. Those words reasonable and proportionate invite disagreement. Who determine what is reasonable and proportionate. CCW safe provides for “necessary force”, that is whatever force is necessary to stop the threat. It is a subtle difference but CCW’s is better defined. There is a difference between necessary and proportional.
CCW Safe
A “Recognized Self-Defense Use of Force Incident” is an incident where force is used pursuant to a reasonable belief that use of deadly force is necessary to protect from imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. This includes any necessary force with all legal weapons and physical force to defend against a life-threatening attack in self-defense.
USCCA
“Act of self-defense” means the act of defending one’s person or others against an unlawful, unprovoked, and imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm by an aggressor, but only if:
1. any force used is both reasonable under the circumstances and proportionate to the threat; and
2. the act is permitted by applicable law.
The the subtle difference is that CCW covers any necessary force while USCCA requires the force be reasonable and proportionate. Those words reasonable and proportionate invite disagreement. Who determine what is reasonable and proportionate. CCW safe provides for “necessary force”, that is whatever force is necessary to stop the threat. It is a subtle difference but CCW’s is better defined. There is a difference between necessary and proportional.
CodeSection
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2011
- Messages
- 251
Yep and as pointed out in other posts, with USCCA you are dealing with their insurance company which may not have your total interest in mind. Though even with CCW Safe's subscription/contract there could be possible conflicts too.
As mentioned, for years I have had and continue to have both CCW Safe for unlimited legal representation and USCCA really for their $2,000,000 civil liability coverage. Though you can buy civil liability coverage through CCW Safe, but it is more expensive and only covers up to $1,000,000.
1942bull
Member
Good move on your part. Civil liability is a serious threat in a self defense matter. It is easier to get slammed in civil court than in criminal court. I cover that with an umbrella liability policy that covers anything not covered by other policies. Of course it has to be from legal activity. So if you get criminally convicted it will not apply. That is as I recall also a provision in the self defense insurance policies that cover civil liability.
bullseye308
Member
I have uscca and have for a few years. I got to meet a rep at a meeting for a group I’m in and they explained what they do, what they cover, and lots of details not mentioned in most places other than the fine print. Every conceivable position I could imagine I’d be in they cover. Obviously, life being what it is, nuances biting the butt notwithstanding, I’m extremely happy with their offerings and will continue to pray I never need their services.
CodeSection
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2011
- Messages
- 251
My umbrella policy is much, much higher than's USCCA coverage. However, I was told (and I believe read years ago) it would not cover a shooting arriving from intentional acts of violence. There would no civil liability coverage even though one was defending themselves and shot an innocent bystander when engaging the perp. I guess I need to reread my umbrella policy again.
What insurance company do you use that issues an umbrella that covers such exposure?
1942bull
Member
Sorry, but I am not going to answer that question. My answer could be misleading because every state has its own insurance laws, and they are complex. In examining an umbrella policy coverage you have to look at coverage for bodily injury or death to a claimant. If that is covered, you have to look ar definitions of intentional and unintentional. Policies will cover unintentional but not intentional. So the answer you seek is dependent upon whether injury from self defense is either intentional or unintentional. That involves state case law. All that totally confused me so I did the CYA maneuver of asking the question in writing to the insurance company.
I asked: if I shoot a person in self defense and am sued, am I covered ? If I received a “yes” answer I saved it. If i received an answer from other companies with a No I ignored them. Whatever answer you get keep a a copy just in case.
‘
CapnMac
Member
It's probably important to note that those proposed policies are more like auto accident policies with the mandating government as the beneficiary of any and all claims made.
Which is different from most "carry insurance" which is more about being able to afford competent counsel if and event occurs. (This as a person can incur significant legal invoices even if "no billed" on charges for an "event.")
Hokkmike
Member
Too many protection schemes out there. Not just for guns. They all want your money up front and make a lot of promises. In the end, they know, the the great, overwhelming, majority of people will not require use of their product. And when it is time for them to pony up all kinds of exceptions to what you thought was covered apply.
patmccoy
Member
As always with insurance policies, "the large print giveth, but the fine print taketh away". You need to read and fully understand (not think you understand) both the policy's large print and fine print (and helping you do that is the agent's job),
- Status
