Although both of these companies are helping you mitigate against a similar risk - I.E., the risk of liability that accrues following the use of a firearm for self-defense purposes -they are not insuring you against the same type of loss.
**In the interests of full-disclosure, I recently became an "affiliated attorney" with the ACLDN. However, I do not work for either of these companies.
In the case of the ACLDN, your membership provides a benefit that directly supports the costs of litigation. The benefit to ACLDN is that if you are involved in a self-defense incident, they don't reimburse you later - they pay the attorney directly and immediately. The point of this is to ensure that representation starts as soon as possible. In addition, ACLDN provides defense and strategy advice to the attorney and can provide expert witness testimony where appropriate. So, in essence, purchasing a membership in ACLDN is all about mitigating the costs of litigation in advance.
In contrast, unless I'm not understanding it, USCCA is a true insurance policy. The site is rather vague on details, though. However, it appears that their coverage is for liability after the fact (I.E., a civil judgement against you or the costs of an attorney, but only after you've already paid them). That's an important point - USCCA may cover your costs, but not until you've already shelled out the money. More importantly, they only reimburse you if you're acquitted. They apparently do have a grant program for payment of fees in advance, but it's discretionary (on their part). I'm not entirely clear on this point, but I believe, unlike ACLDN, USCCA will cover a civil judgment against you up to the limits of your "policy".
In the end, both are risk management plans. You have to decide for yourself whether this is a risk you want, or have a need, to manage and, if so, what the value of that risk is. For example, if you think you'll never get sued or have to use a firearm in self-defense, then these types of plans aren't for you. Or, if you're comfortable mortgaging your house to pay for legal costs rather than paying annually in advance, again, these plans are unnecessary. But if you'd prefer the consistency of a known annual cost with protection against an unknown future cost, then these may be plans worth pursuing. Remember that risk management plans (I.E., insurance) aren't about removing the risk, they're about minimizing the risk and distributing the costs associated with that risk.
NRA Benefactor Life Member
Information posted in these forums is my personal opinion only. It is not intended, nor should it be construed, as legal advice.