Opinions Wanted: Legal Help Organizations

[alamogunr]

I keep getting mail, email, etc from USCCA and seeing ads in the gun mags for Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network. Does anyone have an opinion on these? Hopefully, no one has had to use either but if so, what was the experience? If either or both is worthwhile, which would you recommend? Are there others out there(NRA?) that provide similar service?

[Smoke4320]

US Law Shield is another one .. There are at least 4 companies all offering about the same services that I know of
I will say US Law Shield is regularly sending me info on results of cases, on things to think about (no cost training ideas, situation awareness ect)
and of course pay for training .. better than some that take your money and you only hear from them again next year when its time to renew

[Plate plinker]

Acldn that’s massads outfit. Watch his videos and maybe you will decide from there.

[waksupi]

Having it would almost infer intent, to me.

[DCP]

I went with USCCA I thought they had a little more coverage for the money.

[JBinMN]

Having it would almost infer intent, to me.

I can see where this could thought by some, but at the same time, having car insurance or medical insurance does not mean that someone has "intent"( or "intended) to get into a car accident, or need medical treatment. Insurance is simply a way to offset any cost incurred by whatever one has insured.

It does remind me though, of buying insurance just before you get on an airplane. Back when they used to offer a policy right there in the airport in a "vending machine"... { For those who never heard of such a thing.. here is a link to learn what I am talking about>> Some Airport Ins. Vend. Machine info (https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/breaking-news/a-look-back-whatever-happened-to-airport-insurance-vending-machines-22593.aspx) Note the very last sentence in the article... ;)}

Dunno if that sort of thing is still offered anywhere, anymore, but I kind of thought it a bit paranoid of anyone who bought it. The likelihood/odds of being involved in a plane crash is probably comparable to the likelihood/odds of being in a self defense situation for most folks. IMO, of course.

I do not have any experience in having any sort of insurance like this, but at the same time, I am not worrying about it either. "Qui sera sera"... YMMV of course.
;)

G'Luck! to the OP, & an interesting subject in a way. Certainly apropos for the group that frequents this site. Thanks for bringing it up!
:)

[kayala]

I'm afraid that this insurance will be lobbied towards making it mandatory for carrying - it's the only reason I'm not supporting any of those.

[mold maker]

It's no problem to stop emails from such. Just block the address. As far as USPS mail, there is a return address on their mailings. Either fill the return envelope with junk paper and return it, or trash it.
Ain't no free lunch, you have to pay for what you expect to get. If the service is suspect, ignore it. If it offers service you need, proceed.
Warning, it is insurance and you'll only find it's worthless if you try to use it. Of course, it might be all you expect also.

[Wayne Smith]

And it no more shows intent than fire insurance shows intent to arson!

[DCP]

Having it would almost infer intent, to me.

Let's think about this statement for a bit. You're carrying a deadly weapon for what reason?

[popper]

Mark as spam. I 'unregistered' and still get the stuff.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

I gave it a lot of thought and study, and ended up going with the NRA's program, CarryGuard, at the Silver level. About $250 per year.

One of the different programs went like this: You pay a monthly premium into the fund, and if you need a defense we'll devote 1/2 of the money in the fund to your case. But the question arises, what if there are several incidents in play at the same time? Seems to me you could have precious little available for your defense, and the plan might even bankrupt. The NRA's plan seems the most comprehensive, and they are backed by an actual well respected insurance company.

Yes, I'm sure (having been in court many times) that a defense attorney will ask why you obtained the insurance and were you planning on using it?

I've already got my answer: No, but we're living in an increasingly evil world, and I couldn't ignore the possibility that I might need it through no fault of my own. The same reason that I buy auto and fire insurance.

Better to have and not need, than need and not have. Nobody wants to be involved in a traffic collision or have their house burn down -- but these things do happen. Trouble can come your way.....

[DCP]

https://www.concealedcarry.com/law/shield-carry-guard-two-different-programs-compared/

[DCP]

most up to date


https://www.concealedcarry.com/self-defense-gun-owner-insurance-programs-compared/

[BrassMagnet]

George Zimmerman did not have it. He owes legal bills in excess of half a million dollars.
I guess that is the cost of freedom!
I would rather pay USCCA than risk that kind of debt.
NRA treated USCCA poorly when NRA launched their competing insurance line.
Yes, I am a life NRA member.

[Biggin]

+1 on previous post brassmagnet took the words right out my mouth.

[JimB..]

George Zimmerman did not have it. He owes legal bills in excess of half a million dollars.
I guess that is the cost of freedom!


The story I heard was that his attorneys took the case pro bono, but after he started an online effort to raise money, and raised about $.5mm for his legal fees, the lawyers decided that they should bill him. The total bill was over $2mm, the money from the online effort went to the attornies, and Z hasn’t actually paid anything himself. He went into the process broke and making poor life decisions, and he came out of the process broke and making poor life decisions.

Not debating your point, just always found the story interesting.

[Minerat]

I'm NRA life too but went with US Law Shield. As a CCW permitee I felt it was better to be prepared and know you have an attorney on call if needed then try to find one after the fact.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Thanks for your research, DCP. Myself, being an NRA Benefactor Life Member, I continuously received e-mailings from them about CarryGuard.Their program looks much better in the second analysis than the first, but USCCA also seems to be a good program. I'll just point out several things, none of which are meant to attack anyone's choice of program. First, the NRA program has different levels of coverage and you can buy what you think you might need. Secondly, speaking just for yourself and myself, as long term ex-LEOs I think we've already gotten a level of training far above what any of these programs teach and know very well when a shooting is or isn't justifiable. Also, at my age and condition of health, it just doesn't matter if someone attacks me with a club, brick, knife, gun, or even fists -- if they are capable of inflicting great bodily harm to me and trying to do it, they will meet with the same response which is to be shot. Covered! As for home, spouse, travel, etc., everyone's circumstances are different and you have to choose a plan according to your individual needs. Again, thanks, nice comparison chart. I'm sure all these plans will evolve to some extent with time.

[alamogunr]

George Zimmerman did not have it. He owes legal bills in excess of half a million dollars.
I guess that is the cost of freedom!
I would rather pay USCCA than risk that kind of debt.
NRA treated USCCA poorly when NRA launched their competing insurance line.
Yes, I am a life NRA member.

Other than competition, was there any reason that "NRA dis-invited the USCCA from their convention earlier this year"? Last quote from ConcealedCarry.com.

[BrassMagnet]

Other than competition, was there any reason that "NRA dis-invited the USCCA from their convention earlier this year"? Last quote from ConcealedCarry.com.

I listen to Armed American Radio every Sunday night and I have not heard any reason. Sounds like a "kill competition" reason to me!