Do You Need Carry Insurance?

[sobo]

I called USCCA today, asked if I was at work and I packed, if I used justified lethal force to protect myself, would I still be covered? they said.....NOPE! not when you are on the clock, specially since your employer doesn't allow weapons on campus/property etc. <emphasis added by sobo>

So I asked the person to cancel my account... sad, I paid for many years and they just throw you under the bus. Oh well, better to know now then to actually be involved in a situation and find out the hard way.

USCCA and go F themselves as far as I am concerned, so be aware.

I do not wish to provoke an argument with you here, but I believe that you are being disingenuous in your scathing rebuke of USCCA. It appears to me that you either did not read the policy, or you did not understand what was in the policy. It states VERY CLEARLY in the policy that you are "...covered wherever you are legally allowed to carry a firearm..." Since you indicated that your "...employer doesn't allow weapons on campus/property/etc.", then that's no fault of the USCCA that they will not cover you there. You need to take that up with your employer. In short, caveat emptor...

 

[Koda]

I do not wish to provoke an argument with you here, but I believe that you are being disingenuous in your scathing rebuke of USCCA. It appears to me that you either did not read the policy, or you did not understand what was in the policy. It states VERY CLEARLY in the policy that you are "...covered wherever you are legally allowed to carry a firearm..." Since you indicated that your "...employer doesn't allow weapons on campus/property/etc.", then that's no fault of the USCCA that they will not cover you there. You need to take that up with your employer. In short, caveat emptor...

I dont know about other states laws, but in Oregon... the state biggie24420 lives in, its legal to carry in places of employment or private property that prohibit carry (as it should be).

 

[sobo]

So, let me see if I got this right... In Oregon, state law says it's legal to carry in places of employment or private property that prohibit carry.
Yet by his own admission, biggie's employer prohibits carry. Is not biggie's employer now in violation of state law? Why isn't biggie's employer prosecuted for breaking that state law?

 

[Koda]

So, let me see if I got this right... In Oregon, state law says it's legal to carry in places of employment or private property that prohibit carry.
Yet by his own admission, biggie's employer prohibits carry. Is not biggie's employer now in violation of state law? Why isn't biggie's employer prosecuted for breaking that state law?

property owners have a legal right to prohibit carry on their property. The law allows them to fire employees or trespass anyone for carrying, at that point the person is subject to the law of trespass at which point the person has to immediately comply (and rightly so). They cannot be charged with illegal carrying because its not illegal to carry, but they can be charged with tresspassing if they dont immediately comply with the request to leave. In any case, they are not illegally carrying... there is no law in Oregon that gives property owners legal right to prohibit carrying, just trespassing.
If USCCAs policy does cover a person lawfully carrying, then I wont do business with them.

 

[sobo]

If USCCAs policy does cover a person lawfully carrying, then I wont do business with them.

Fair enough...
Still seems like it's incumbent upon the purchaser of the policy to know both the state law AND the limits/exclusions of the policy. Again, caveat emptor.

 

[Koda]

@sobo the laws are different in each state but it comes down to whats called signage laws. That is if the state has a law that says a policy or no guns signs carry the weight of the law (different than trespassing laws) then a person carrying is carrying illegally if they ignore those signs. Some states have such laws, I believe they are unconstitutional laws and anti-gun. I respect employer and property owners policies though 100% but dealing with the gun issue as a matter of trespassing laws is a fair constitutional compromise.

In regards to USCCA covering a person in a signage state, the thing to realize is gun carry laws are completely different than self defense laws. If someone is illegally carrying a gun, that doesnt mean they legally cant defend themself with it. If USCCA will not cover a lawful self defense claim they are anti-gun and a rip off. In all cases of any carry insurance policies, none that I know of defend carry law violations... all expect their members to carry legally and any such violations are not covered by any policy... the person is on their own. Carry laws are different than self defense laws.

 

[sobo]

...That is if the state has a law that says a policy or no guns signs carry the weight of the law (different than trespassing laws) then a person carrying is carrying illegally if they ignore those signs...

I agree that this is unconstitutional, but trespassing law a fair compromise, as you do.

...the thing to realize is gun carry laws are completely different than self defense laws. If someone is illegally carrying a gun, that doesnt mean they legally cant defend themself with it.

Agreed.

...If USCCA will not cover a lawful self defense claim they are anti-gun and a rip off. In all cases of any carry insurance policies, none that I know of defend carry law violations... all expect their members to carry legally and any such violations are not covered by any policy... the person is on their own. Carry laws are different than self defense laws.

But then, we are back to the circular argument of legal carry vs. illegal carry, and is a DGU covered when carry is deemed illegal?

 

[Koda]

But then, we are back to the circular argument of legal carry vs. illegal carry, and is a DGU covered when carry is deemed illegal?

not circular. Carry laws are completely different than self defense laws, they are not the same.
In some cases a prohibited person (felon) is legally allowed to lawfully defend themselves with a gun. They will still be charged with illegal possession of the gun, but not charged with murder or unlawful use of force. Another example: if your illegally carrying a gun and get caught, no "carry insurance" entity will cover your legal fees.

So the differenced between the two are not circular, but two different legal doctrines. I will note however that I dont know how other "carry" programs consider this topic.... I just know that carry laws are different than self defense laws.

 

[Flymph]

I'm selling meteor insurance, you'd feel better paying me $200 a month knowing you will be protected by our umbrella policy.
Here's your umbrella, now sign across the dotted line...
BTW I only take cash and money order.

 

[sobo]

not circular. Carry laws are completely different than self defense laws, they are not the same.
In some cases a prohibited person (felon) is legally allowed to lawfully defend themselves with a gun. They will still be charged with illegal possession of the gun, but not charged with murder or unlawful use of force. Another example: if your illegally carrying a gun and get caught, no "carry insurance" entity will cover your legal fees.

So the differenced between the two are not circular, but two different legal doctrines. I will note however that I dont know how other "carry" programs consider this topic.... I just know that carry laws are different than self defense laws.

I'm just going to say that I concur with your autosig, Koda. Just change the words "gun law" to "carry insurance" and I'm all in!

 

[Koda]

I'm just going to say that I concur with your autosig, Koda. Just change the words "gun law" to "carry insurance" and I'm all in!

I'll confuse the topic even more by saying Im not a lawyer, this is just how I understand it and feel confident Im right. I just have a hard time believing that if one is breaking one law they are not legally allowed to defend their life from someone else breaking a greater different law (trying to kill you). If I'm wrong, at the very least USCCA should have replied to biggie24420 in regards to the law of the state he resides in which is concerning they didnt. In Oregon its legal to carry against company policy, they should at least know this and cover him.

 

[sobo]

Agreed. With my USCCA coverage expiring in two days, I need an alternative.

Putting It Out There:
Massad Ayoob's ACLDN was mentioned upthread, I've read articles on Guns and Ammo about CCW-Safe... Are you fellers familiar with any other outfits that would be a good place to re-insure myself? I don't want to spend the next week scouring the innerwebz, so if you've had a positive experience with an outfit, I'd love to know the name of it.

 

[Koda]

Agreed. With my USCCA coverage expiring in two days, I need an alternative.

Putting It Out There:
Massad Ayoob's ACLDN was mentioned upthread, I've read articles on Guns and Ammo about CCW-Safe... Are you fellers familiar with any other outfits that would be a good place to re-insure myself? I don't want to spend the next week scouring the innerwebz, so if you've had a positive experience with an outfit, I'd love to know the name of it.

Im a member of ACLDN and have nothing but positive experience with it. Grant it.... Ive never had to actually use it.... which is part of the plan.
I do enjoy their free monthly blogs covering legal use of force topics and advice (often by Ayoob himself).

 

[sobo]

Thanks, Koda. I see you're from Oregon, and that being the case you might not pay a lot of attention to 2A issues in Washington, but would you be aware if the twits in Olympia are giving the ACLDN a shakedown like USCCA just got?

 

[Koda]

Thanks, Koda. I see you're from Oregon, and that being the case you might not pay a lot of attention to 2A issues in Washington, but would you be aware if the twits in Olympia are giving the ACLDN a shakedown like USCCA just got?

The state is investigating them but they are still able to offer their services because ACLDN is actually not selling insurance, ACLDN is a financial network for members they dont defend you they pay for your legal fees only you find your own lawyer.

https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/august-2019-presidents-message

 

[sobo]

Thanks, Koda. I'll look in to them this week.

 

[biggie24420]

Private property can create a gun free zone and policies and ask people not to bring firearms on their campus/property. It's not law, it's policy

People in h3ll can also ask for ice water, doesn't mean they'll get what they asked or wished for.

If the sheep want to be victims at my work, that's their choice. I am not a sheep, I think for myself.

 

[dcfranzen]

Insurance while good is bad. It leads to higher consumer pricing and restrictions on consumer use. Like medical, dental, homeowners, and vehicle insurance was thought to be a good thing when introduced it is now a financial drain or a service inhibitor.