Self Defense Insurance

[FormerNavy]

So this seems to still be a limited informative topic. I have been doing research and what I find is that USCCA is a fraud. CCW Safe is the only company with a listed case they fought and one for someone using deadly force with a firearm. They fought and won. The hang ups are that if your charged, they don't cover for FLP or USCCA, but CCW Safe does. There is an attorneys for freedom that goes through the contracts for FLP and USCCA and he points out that you are not covered and think you may be. That's pretty scary! Can we get this topic going and get this resolved once and for all?

I would be surprised if the armed citizens legal defense network (which they say is technically NOT an insurance plan) has never fought and won a case, particularly since Mas Ayoob is part of that group, and it's been well documented the number of cases that he's testified on. There is another firearms use of force expert that is part of their group that has a similar number of cases that he is documented to have testified in court that is less well known among the public but is very well known in legal circles but I can't recall his name right now.

I dunno, I might not be so surprised. If you think about it, actual self defense shootings that result in initial charges being filed aren't all that common (not to be confused with claimed self defense that wasn't)... then you would have a subset that would have to be on a plan (CLDN or other) so really the odds are probably fairly statistically small to have all those stars align.

[Cybercop]

I've had this insurance since they first offered it in Ohio, even though I was covered by my department and FOP. I just don't trust any of them to not "Throw me to the wolfs" if it's easier and cheaper. And don't get me started about politics.

Jim

[M-Quigley]

Since this thread has been resurrected, I wanted to add something regarding self defense plans. Although I know a couple of good attorneys should I need one locally, the nice thing about a self defense plan is if you're someplace far away from home when something bad happens and you need a lawyer.
So far this year I've been out of town almost as much as at home.

[kcclark]

Attorneys On Retainer have been making a push into this arena this year, mostly by talking about people who had USCCA coverage but were cut loose by USCCA when the customer needed the coverage.

https://attorneysonretainer.us/resource ... -analyzed/

[tracker1]

The SD insurance market is now very competitive and when you really drill down on some of these negative stories you will often see things a bit different than what was posed. In domestic cases there are a lot of back stories and history that becomes relevant that is not often know by the public.
When I was searching for coverage I had seen with many comparisons the information was false or out of date. As the market gets more crowded companies often up their coverage.
From the starts it’s to my understanding that these cases take a year or two, if you can’t bond out you sit in jail for that time and loose everything you own. Few have the money to bond out so bond has got to be a part of the coverage.
I had ACLDN for many years but they had little or no bond benefits. Even there people are going to look very hard at your case before they dip into their pockets. If there is the ability to opted out on the coverage they will, all of them will.
I think the best thing you can do is take whatever choices you are looking at to an attorney that deals in self defense cases and pay him to look over your choices, it will be the best money spent due to what’s on the line.
Another thing to consider is to review your chosen policies from time to time for any changes they may have made.
I will be reviewing my USCCA policy this winter and also look at others that offer the bond benefit.

[FormerNavy]

The SD insurance market is now very competitive and when you really drill down on some of these negative stories you will often see things a bit different than what was posed. In domestic cases there are a lot of back stories and history that becomes relevant that is not often know by the public.
When I was searching for coverage I had seen with many comparisons the information was false or out of date. As the market gets more crowded companies often up their coverage.
From the starts it’s to my understanding that these cases take a year or two, if you can’t bond out you sit in jail for that time and loose everything you own. Few have the money to bond out so bond has got to be a part of the coverage.
I had ACLDN for many years but they had little or no bond benefits. Even there people are going to look very hard at your case before they dip into their pockets. If there is the ability to opted out on the coverage they will, all of them will.
I think the best thing you can do is take whatever choices you are looking at to an attorney that deals in self defense cases and pay him to look over your choices, it will be the best money spent due to what’s on the line.
Another thing to consider is to review your chosen policies from time to time for any changes they may have made.
I will be reviewing my USCCA policy this winter and also look at others that offer the bond benefit.

And to your point on bond coverage, that was one thing that stuck out to me in looking at Attorneys on Retainer... the bond coverage didn't seem very high.

[tracker1]

Bond is a big deal, can you imagine not being able to make bond and sitting in jail all of that time. It’s a great way for a prosecutor to get you to plead guilty to a lesser charge, that’s how the system works, it keeps the dockets cleared, court cost down, and everyone makes money, your money.

[M-Quigley]

So this seems to still be a limited informative topic. I have been doing research and what I find is that USCCA is a fraud. CCW Safe is the only company with a listed case they fought and one for someone using deadly force with a firearm. They fought and won. The hang ups are that if your charged, they don't cover for FLP or USCCA, but CCW Safe does. There is an attorneys for freedom that goes through the contracts for FLP and USCCA and he points out that you are not covered and think you may be. That's pretty scary! Can we get this topic going and get this resolved once and for all?

Here is what the Armed citizens legal defense network (the one Mas Ayoob is an associate of) says on their site regarding cases. (with most relevant parts bolded)

https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/network-track-record

How has the provision of membership benefits played out in real life? Since the Network opened in 2008, we have paid attorney fees on behalf of thirteen members. In most situations, early representation by aggressive attorneys staved off protracted litigation in either civil or criminal court and to date, no member-involved case has had to be tried in court. Several have come close to going to trial, including one in which the State filed charges twice after losing track of its key witness the first time, then upon finding the supposed victim, it filed charges again.

Our members’ track record of such a low incidence of self-defense emergencies is testament to both the educated and careful self-defense decisions made by Network members, and the fact that we have yet to need to fund a trial underscores the value of having members represented by counsel as quickly as possible after an incident.

It seems that everyone wants to hear the gut-wrenching, real life stories of people shooting to save their lives who then face the wrath of the criminal justice system. Before opening the Network, we, too, had studied post-incident aftermath stories, and knowing that self defense can be misunderstood by the law motivated us to form the Network on the concept of membership benefits, extended when the member’s need for an attorney arises, not as reimbursement.

It is our contention that any use of force in self defense generates the need for legal representation during interaction with responding officers, investigators and prosecutors.

The link then goes on to list a few stories. The one titled defensive display is particularly interesting, since the victim was being threatened with charges despite a body cam confirming his side of the story (which the prosecutor didn't even review until allegedly 3 weeks after the incident)

I guess I thought they had actually gone to trial and won cases because Mas Ayoob is involved, but most of the cases he cites as being an expert witness on were before 2008, when ACLDN was started.