NRA endorsed self defense liability insurance

[wakproductions]

I occasionally get advertisements from the NRA promoting their self-defense liability insurance. Does anyone have experience with it? Is it useful to have? I think it's a good idea, but just want to make sure there's not a scam somewhere in the fine print.

https://mynrainsurance.com/insurance-products/self-defense

 

[VERT]

Administered by Lockton Risk which is a reputable company. Keep in mind the insurance can not pay out until after your found not guilty. I carried it until a couple of years ago when I switched to Second Call Defense. The insurance by itself is cheaper though. The insurance is a rider on top of a general liabilit policy. Or at least that is the way it used to work.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Administered by Lockton Risk which is a reputable company. Keep in mind the insurance can not pay out until after your found not guilty. I carried it until a couple of years ago when I switched to Second Call Defense. The insurance by itself is cheaper though. The insurance is a rider on top of a general liability policy. Or at least that is the way it used to work.

Does this mean that if you are not criminally charged, and then lose a civil case, you are short?

 

[DRob]

Don't know about the NRA insurance but we have a 1 million dollar personal liability policy through State Farm. Too cheap to not have.

 

[VERT]

Does this mean that if you are not criminally charged, and then lose a civil case, you are short?

I was referring to criminal defense. My understanding is the criminal defense and civil defense are separate. But I wonder what would happen if you are convicted in the criminal case.

what I was told suing recruiter training was that insurance can not legally pay ou until after trial. Shooting somebody in self defense is an intentional act.

Oh oh and the insurance did not include use of weapons other then firearms. I don't know if this has changed.

 

[IndyDave1776]

My understanding is the criminal defense and civil defense are separate. But I wonder what would happen if you are convicted in the criminal case.

If it is actual liability, that would be a civil matter across the board. If it is insurance on the cost of defense, that would be another animal. I am guessing that if it is a consideration that you be found 'not guilty' that being found guilty would disqualify you, leading to my question based on the notion that if you are not criminally charged, you cannot be found guilty or not guilty either one.

 

[VERT]

Don't know about the NRA insurance but we have a 1 million dollar personal liability policy through State Farm. Too cheap to not have.

I have State Farm insurance. Are you sure your liability covers self defense?

 

[IndyDave1776]

I was referring to criminal defense. My understanding is the criminal defense and civil defense are separate. But I wonder what would happen if you are convicted in the criminal case.

what I was told suing recruiter training was that insurance can not legally pay ou until after trial. Shooting somebody in self defense is an intentional act.

Oh oh and the insurance did not include use of weapons other then firearms. I don't know if this has changed.

Here we go...

WHAT’S COVERED

Your defense costs and damages in a civil suit
Reimbursement for criminal defense costs when you are acquitted of charges
Bodily injury and damage caused by the use of a firearm
Your spouse is automatically included on your policy

Apparently, civil damages regardless, and criminal defense so long as you are acquitted. Doesn't sound like a bad idea, even if it would be completely superfluous if our courts had a shred of reason to them.

 

[VERT]

If it is actual liability, that would be a civil matter across the board. If it is insurance on the cost of defense, that would be another animal. I am guessing that if it is a consideration that you be found 'not guilty' that being found guilty would disqualify you, leading to my question based on the notion that if you are not criminally charged, you cannot be found guilty or not guilty either one.

There is a liability limit for accidental shooting, a policy for criminal denfense, and a policy against civil suits.

How the Second Call Defense gets around this is there is a pot of money to hire an attorney and initiate criminal and civil defense. Once a person is found not guilty or more likely never goes to trial, the fund is reimbursed by the insurance policy.

 

[GNRPowdeR]

There is a liability limit for accidental shooting, a policy for criminal denfense, and a policy against civil suits.

How the Second Call Defense gets around this is there is a pot of money to hire an attorney and initiate criminal and civil defense. Once a person is found not guilty or more likely never goes to trial, the fund is reimbursed by the insurance policy.

CCWSafe has something similar, but they don't differentiate between firearms vs anything used as a weapon for defense. Comparison Chart

 

[bwframe]

Don't know about the NRA insurance but we have a 1 million dollar personal liability policy through State Farm. Too cheap to not have.

Ball park price?

 

[RobbyMaQ]

[STRIKE]I carry a 750k 20 yr term through Erie for 168$ quarterly. But I still have kids at home, mortgage, etc...[/STRIKE]
reading comprehension FAIL. this is my homeowners insurance. Need to check my umbrella policy for coverage/cost.

 

[Hardscrable]

Don't know about the NRA insurance but we have a 1 million dollar personal liability policy through State Farm. Too cheap to not have.

I also have a one million policy from Farm Bureau for $400 + change/year. However my understanding is that it does not cover self defense. You should check if you want that type coverage.

 

[VERT]

The problem with insuring self denfense is that taking action to protect yourself is a willfull act. Liability covers accidents or negligence. But neither is what has occurred if I need to use my firearm. This apparently makes insurance companies, law makers and lawyers pee their panties.

 

[Hardscrable]

The problem with insuring self denfense is that taking action to protect yourself is a willfull act. Liability covers accidents or negligence. But neither is what has occurred if I need to use my firearm. This apparently makes insurance companies, law makers and lawyers pee their panties.

That is also my understanding.

 

[OutdoorDad]

An umbrella policy might cover you if someone accidentally shoots themselves while standing in your front yard.

But if you intentionally shoot someone who's breaking in, expect no help.

Odd, but true.

 

[bwframe]

An umbrella policy might cover you if someone accidentally shoots themselves while standing in your front yard.

But if you intentionally shoot someone who's breaking in, expect no help.

Odd, but true.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I'm going to take a second, and be "that guy" (again). It seems odd to me that the NRA is pushing this. What they should be pushing (and I don't know if they do), is civil immunity for a legitimate self defense occurrence (ie no conviction, no civil suit). So begs the question, "has this come about out of concern for gun owners, or to put more money in the organization?" It's honestly puzzling.

Secondly, let's say you, heaven forbid, are actually in a self-defense shooting. How well do you think it's going to play out if the other side gets wind of you having a NRA "Shoot 'em and we'll pay for it" insurance policy. The spin will undoubtedly be "he wanted to shoot someone so bad, that he got an insurance policy." No bueno.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I'm going to take a second, and be "that guy" (again). It seems odd to me that the NRA is pushing this. What they should be pushing (and I don't know if they do), is civil immunity for a legitimate self defense occurrence (ie no conviction, no civil suit). So begs the question, "has this come about out of concern for gun owners, or to put more money in the organization?" It's honestly puzzling.

Secondly, let's say you, heaven forbid, are actually in a self-defense shooting. How well do you think it's going to play out if the other side gets wind of you having a NRA "Shoot 'em and we'll pay for it" insurance policy. The spin will undoubtedly be "he wanted to shoot someone so bad, that he got an insurance policy." No bueno.

 

[VERT]

I'm going to take a second, and be "that guy" (again). It seems odd to me that the NRA is pushing this. What they should be pushing (and I don't know if they do), is civil immunity for a legitimate self defense occurrence (ie no conviction, no civil suit). So begs the question, "has this come about out of concern for gun owners, or to put more money in the organization?" It's honestly puzzling.

Secondly, let's say you, heaven forbid, are actually in a self-defense shooting. How well do you think it's going to play out if the other side gets wind of you having a NRA "Shoot 'em and we'll pay for it" insurance policy. The spin will undoubtedly be "he wanted to shoot someone so bad, that he got an insurance policy." No bueno.

I think the NRA is pushing for such laws. I base that on the fact that they support the evi "shoot first" ....... I mean "castle doctrine". I don't know if NRA makes money from insurance sales or they just endorse the company as a partner. Lockton Risk is its own company and there are other members of the NRA business alliance. Truth be told I have no problem with NRA getting a kick back. I am a Second Call Defense "recruiter" and there is a small commission program. I elect to give mine back to Dick Heller's foundation.

Anything can be argued or scenario played out. Personally if I shoot someone I want a good lawyer. Getting insurance or being part of a group to defend you in court does not prove intent. I am sure law enforcement has a union or organization to help protect their interests. That group might also have lawyers and mental health professionals available to help the officer if they were involved in a shooting. Regardless of what the news tells me I don't believe cops are looking to shoot people because their fraternal organizations will protect them.