Legal & Carry Insurance Coverage

ZigZagZeke · Oct 17, 2017

What do you do about legal insurance if you carry and have to use it in self-defense? Do you have general legal insurance coverage (e.g. LegalShield), or do you carry specific coverage for criminal defense in a DGU situation (NRA)? The coverage offered by the NRA is almost as expensive as full legal coverage offered by LegalShield, but it's limited (apparently) to DGU situations. LegalShield is a nuisance, since they want to bill a credit card every month, but it's good coverage that covers wills and other legal services besides DGU. The NRA stuff is very limited coverage for not a lot less. Are there other alternatives out there?

Stomper · Oct 17, 2017

Concealed Carry Insurance - The Truth About Guns

WALawyer · Oct 18, 2017

Put the money you would spend on "insurance" into an interest bearing savings account. The chances of you actually needing to use it is very, very slim. When you invariably end up not using it on legal bills, you can then use it for retirement, vacation, wedding, funeral, whatever. At least it's still yours and not someone else's.

Self defense cases are won or lost based on your actions during the event and immediately afterward. What happens in court six months to a year later is less important.

ZigZagZeke · Oct 18, 2017

Stomper said:
Concealed Carry Insurance - The Truth About Guns

Thank you. That's very helpful.

The one case study cited in the article is a perfect example of what I keep talking about regarding mental health services. In 1960 the perpetrator would have been in a state run, locked down facility getting treatment, not in a house converted into a group home in a residential district. This whole home invasion scenario would not have happened. Instead, we de-institutionalized mental health care in 1970, effectively privatizing it. This incident occurred because we thought it was important that somebody make a profit by treating our mentally ill neighbors, so the process could be more efficient and less expensive. Being more efficient and less expensive involves sacrifices. In this case, the patient's safety, and that of those who lived near the residential treatment facility was what was sacrificed. This shooting and death would not have occurred in 1960, when we had an effective government operated mental health care system. In this case, the efficiency of the free market came at a cost of lives lost and disrupted, and an increase in crime statistics.

noforce · Nov 10, 2017

USCCA it's a small payment for the coverage and security

No_Regerts · Nov 10, 2017

Check your state laws on liability after a shooting. In some states, once a shooting is deemed justified, the shooter can't be held liable and court fees are waived or reimbursed.

Diamondback · Nov 10, 2017

No_Regerts said:
Check your state laws on liability after a shooting. In some states, once a shooting is deemed justified, the shooter can't be held liable and court fees are waived or reimbursed.

The problem is getting from A to C... it's the funding to sustain whatever legal fees are needed in B to get cleared. How far do YOU trust Mark Roe, Dan Satterburg, or Mark Lindquist to not go Jack the Hack McCoy on somebody just because they don't like his gun?

If I were financially solid enough, I'd have both USCCA (which also gives Return on Investment via education and training resources) and Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network memberships household-wide.

Call me paranoid, but I've seen enough documented cases of prosecutorial misconduct in the Ayoob Files (remember Bernie Goetz in New York?) to be instinctively wary...