Jump to content

CCW Insurance


Bowfisher

Recommended Posts

If all those that are so worried about legal ramifications there is a simple solution. DON'T CARRY

 

I disagree with your statement. I think it is important to look at all aspects and what may/may not happen afterwards. I do not want to put my family's financial state in jeopardy because I was to short sighted to consider the possible implications of using deadly force.

 

I have looked at a few different policies from various provides such as NRA, but most are designed to be reimbursements verses paying up front. I reviewed one that allows you small amount of cash up front and then you can approve for further funds.

 

The one that has interested me the most CHL Protection Plan. Does anyone have any experience with this plan?

 

Thanks,

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no such thing.

That's not true, there definitely is such a thing as self defense insurance which will cover your legal fees if you ever have to use your gun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If all those that are so worried about legal ramifications there is a simple solution. DON'T CARRY

No offense, but that's just dumb. I am worried some day if I am careless or my kids or a sicko burns my hosue down... Your answer is don't own a house?

 

My answer is have self defense insurance. I hope I never need it. I probably never will, but I have it. Same goes for self defense insurance. I will seriously be looking at this as the time approaches for carry concealed. I currently carry a knife so I should probably look sooner rather than later. And what if someone breaks into my house? I should really look into this. Lawyers are expensive!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no such thing.

That's not true, there definitely is such a thing as self defense insurance which will cover your legal fees if you ever have to use your gun.

 

 

Wasn't Kwame Raoul trying to pass a bill to force us people with guns to buy mandatory liability insurance? Haha...

 

Senators Harris, Munoz, and SIlverstein all had bills with language that would have required $1,000,000 liability coverage for "any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts". When this is debated it becomes clear that their intent is, at least in part, to indemnify the city against medical costs resulting from the criminal use of firearms, Coverage for that does not exist.

 

In addition to that, those specialty self defense policies that are available usually offer liability coverage maximums much less than the $1M limit specified, and are typically geared more toward payment of legal defense costs.

 

The sponsors of those bills seem to suffer from a common misunderstanding about the purpose of liability insurance. It is not a pool of money from which to draw funds to fix social ills. It is intended to protect the assets of the insured, and that means it often primarily provides a defense against civil claims, but only when those claims are within the scope of coverage. Gang activity and other illegal acts are not within that scope, and commonly no acts "expected or intended by the insured" are covered under the main stream umbrella type of coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should the city be on the line for medical expenses at any point in time for any reason? I never once understood that argument, not for a second. It seemed preposterous to me that when one gang banger shoots another that the city should incur medical expenses for said gang banger.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should the city be on the line for medical expenses at any point in time for any reason? I never once understood that argument, not for a second. It seemed preposterous to me that when one gang banger shoots another that the city should incur medical expenses for said gang banger.

They have to at least pay the coroner, first responders etc. [purple]if the shooter had this mysterious 'insurance' for their illegal gun then the city wouldn't incur the expense...[/purple]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure yeah I get the expense of the police, fire etc... but they way the loud mouths pushing for said insurance made it seems like paying expenses to care for the shooting victim to make them well again.

 

No actually I don't get the expense for the police or fire etc... that's all over head. They are on the clock and getting paid for their time already. It's not like they are getting called in on their day off or anything like that. Sure there are costs incurred but those costs are already a part of the budget, not an add on cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure yeah I get the expense of the police, fire etc... but they way the loud mouths pushing for said insurance made it seems like paying expenses to care for the shooting victim to make them well again.

 

No actually I don't get the expense for the police or fire etc... that's all over head. They are on the clock and getting paid for their time already. It's not like they are getting called in on their day off or anything like that. Sure there are costs incurred but those costs are already a part of the budget, not an add on cost.

 

Part of the rationale for the incorporation of a city is that the city will provide needed services that the individual cannot provide, such as police, fire, streets, sanitation. If the city or state wants to lay the charges off directly on those using the services, then what are we paying taxes for? Corruption and boondoggles? Do they want to return to the 19th century and require a subscription for fire protection?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure yeah I get the expense of the police, fire etc... but they way the loud mouths pushing for said insurance made it seems like paying expenses to care for the shooting victim to make them well again.

 

No actually I don't get the expense for the police or fire etc... that's all over head. They are on the clock and getting paid for their time already. It's not like they are getting called in on their day off or anything like that. Sure there are costs incurred but those costs are already a part of the budget, not an add on cost.

 

Part of the rationale for the incorporation of a city is that the city will provide needed services that the individual cannot provide, such as police, fire, streets, sanitation. If the city or state wants to lay the charges off directly on those using the services, then what are we paying taxes for? Corruption and boondoggles? Do they want to return to the 19th century and require a subscription for fire protection?

That was exactly my point!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a meeting last week and a retired LEO with 30 years experience said that if you are going to CCW you had better check into and get some kind of CCW insurance. What happens if you shoot a BG and his family sues you or you hit an innocent bystander in a shoot out trying to protect yourself or family? Has anyone got CCW insurance or checked it out. Are you going to CCW without it or travel in other states without it? How much is it? Who sells it? School me.

 

SCAM SCAM SCAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a meeting last week and a retired LEO with 30 years experience said that if you are going to CCW you had better check into and get some kind of CCW insurance. What happens if you shoot a BG and his family sues you or you hit an innocent bystander in a shoot out trying to protect yourself or family? Has anyone got CCW insurance or checked it out. Are you going to CCW without it or travel in other states without it? How much is it? Who sells it? School me.

 

SCAM SCAM SCAM.

What is a scam and why is it a scam?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My village bought an ambulance using my tax money. We have para medics who are PAID to attend further qualification courses on the taxpayers dime. The vehicles MUST be driven X miles a month to keep them certified.

 

Over 35 years ago my wife needed an ambulance ride. We got a bill of over $900.00 for disturbing their card game.

 

Yes I was glad we had the men and equipment available, most certainly, but would I not be better off not paying all of those taxes for years and simply call a PRIVATE ambulance service the ONE TIME in 40 years that I needed one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a member at the Armed Citizen's Legal Defense Network run by Marty and Gila Hayes with a lot of contribution from Mas Ayoob. I think it has some advantages over "insurance."

First, it's a network. They're not selling you insurance. You're joining a group not unlike Illinois Carry in some ways, with a forum to discuss self-defense and legal questions, and access to a national network of self-defense attorneys.

Second, they will front up to $10,000 initially to hire attorneys and investigators ASAP after a shooting.

Third, they have contacts with expert witnesses (like Ayoob, although if you want him to testify for you, might as well just take his class.)

Fourth, although I wouldn't tell anyone not to buy insurance, there are caveats.

 

As someone pointed out above, liability insurance covers negligence, NOT intentional acts. If your story is that you were holding a burglar at gunpoint, put your finger on the trigger, and the next thing you knew, gosh, it just went off, then maybe you can get a homeowner's policy to cover that under liability. Maybe not. What it's NOT going to cover is any event where your claim is that you fired in self-defense. That's intentional action, and the liability clause doesn't care whether it was justified or not, only whether it was intentional. They don't have to pay, and they won't.

You also have to watch out for the fact that insurance plans can be eager to settle on your behalf. It's not their job to get you acquitted, but to pay as little as possible on average. Remember that George Zimmerman's HOA had insurance, and they paid a couple million dollars out before his trial.

 

Ayoob warns that many defense attorneys have never defended an innocent client, and sometimes it's even worse if they're the high-flying gunslingers who get mobsters off. I feel just as wary of insurance schemes. I'd be very careful.

 

There are also complete frauds out there, so it's not like you don't have to watch out for those. There was a member here, once upon a time, who went on to sell memberships in a fake defense network that made some high-flying promises it couldn't have delivered. Luckily, as far as I know, none of his "members" ever had to call on those services. He also sold fake devices to be plugged into the electrical outlets in your home; they were supposed to keep the radiation/magnetic fields from the outlets from giving you cancer and other diseases.

 

Be careful out there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...