Self Defense insurance comparison chart

[pop pop]

Sorry tried to post a link and it would not work. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by pop pop
link would not work.

[DaveTN]

14 minutes ago, pop pop said:

Sorry tried to post a link and it would not work. 

Is this it?

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

 

[pop pop]

Thanks Dave. Yes that was it. 

I belong to Armed Citizens Legal Def net 360-978-5200. It is a good product for 135.00 for first year then 85.00 per yr from then on. I look at this as just another homeowners policy, (although the ACLDN is not an insurance policy but a network of like minded permit holders,) because if I am forced into a self defense situation, I don't want the lawyers to own my house when it is over.

YMMV and that is OK. Thanks to Dave, this is a fairly good comparison of the orgs. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by pop pop

[DaveTN]

I have asked this in everyone of these insurance threads: Has anyone (that has one of these policy’s) ever accused of a bad shoot, murder or aggravated battery, had their legal fees paid? Other than in ad’s. I don't remember ever getting an answer that can verified. 

I think a lot of people buy these thinking that if they have a bad shoot; their family will be protected financially. I find it hard to believe that would happen. But I have been wrong before.

[pop pop]

Dave, I don't think none of these will pay if one is involved in a "bad shoot." If I understand, they will pay if one was in a justified shoot. ACLDA has a review process one must get through, but they will put up bond money(limited),  and up front lawyer fees (25,000) for members after the incident, then to fund the full defense ( up to 500,000.00)after the board reviews the shoot, IF "In their opinion" it is a good shoot. I KNOW, it has holes in it, but got a better game? __________________ 

Edited to add; IMO, the bond money and 25 thou up front lawyer seed money is worth the 85.00  per yr fee, the rest would be "gravy" if you are forced into a situation where one really needed it. YMMV

Edited May 8, 2020 by pop pop

[midtennchip]

I don't post much anymore, but I will add my 2 cents on this.  First, I am affiliated with both ACLDN and USCCA, so take it for what it's worth.

1.  I know that ACLDN has not had any claims.  I am not sure if USCCA has paid any claims or not.  However, there are two (possibly more) explanations:

    (i)  people who would purchase this type of coverage are much less likely to get into a situation that would require coverage; and

   (ii)  the number of prosecutions for true self-defense shootings are very small.

So, most people looking into this coverage (or actually purchasing it) are very unlikely to need it.  However, if you do ever need it, just like any other insurance coverage.  We buy all kinds of insurance that would rarely be used.

2.  The biggest differences in these coverages are (i) coverage for civil liability and (ii) payment of "compensation while in court."  Some of the lower cost coverages provide cost of civil defense, but not for a judgment.  If the civil judgment coverage is important to you, you should probably check with your homeowners and/or umbrella policy insurer to see if you already have coverage on that.  Many of those insurers exclude such coverage, but not all do (particularly if the shooting is just "negligent" or accidental).  Virtually no coverage will cover intentional act and you'll likely be in jail, anyway.

The only other major difference is expert witnesses and their fees.  Experts will be expensive.  I've never had an expert witness in any case that cost less than $15k.  Getting access to the "best" experts would also be a big plus. Some of those coverages advertise having access to certain experts.