Use of Force Insurance.... Do you have any?

[Mtbkski]

Was wondering whether or not any of you spend the money on paying for "insurance" in case you're involved in a shooting. I know of two companies that currently offer some type of service that if you were ever involved in a shooting, they will provide you with a lawyer.

U.S. Law Shield and Concealed Carry Insurance

While Concealed Carry is more nationwide, I believe that Law Shield is PA and OH based.

Was wondering what your thoughts are on having something like this.

[Daycrawler]

I have U.S. law shield. According to the class I went to, they are nation wide.

[Grizz2720]

Check your home owners insurance you maybe covered.

[Mtbkski]

Check your home owners insurance you maybe covered.

You usually are for a limited amount as long as the incident happens in your home, or, on your property. If the shooting happens anywhere else, you're not covered. From what I have heard the amount they cover is very small, and probably wouldn't cover much in the way of court cost or lawyer fees.

The insurance that these guys provides pays for the Attorney, bail bonds, etc... One covers you everywhere. The other requires an additional fee to cover you outside your home state.

I have tried to find a lawyer around me to put on retainer who is "pro gun" or that is well versed in gun laws. I can't find any that have been able to answer simple questions about gun laws. Not sure I want to have a guy who doesn't know simple gun laws defending me in a shooting.

[God's Country]

This has come up numerous times, and my opinion remains the same. If you want to cover yourself save your money to retain a good lawyer that works for you, not an insurance company that will be seeking to save every penny. Insurance companies in general are legalized con games, and I place zero trust in any of them, much less my freedom. Insurance weighs risk, spreads out the risk as much as possible, and seeks to minimize losses in every conceivable manner. Not for me.

[Mtbkski]

This has come up numerous times, and my opinion remains the same. If you want to cover yourself save your money to retain a good lawyer that works for you, not an insurance company that will be seeking to save every penny. Insurance companies in general are legalized con games, and I place zero trust in any of them, much less my freedom. Insurance weighs risk, spreads out the risk as much as possible, and seeks to minimize losses in every conceivable manner. Not for me.

I understand your point. But you can say the same about homeowners insurance, medical, car, etc..... Just save up your money just in case. You don't have to pay for those stupid insurance premiums. But if that time comes. I'm betting you don't have the money "saved up" to cover all your cost. Most of us would be surprised how little our homeowners actually covers. I called and found out NONE of my expensive toys (bikes, guns, etc) are really covered much at all unless they are in my house. Once you leave the house with them, they are no longer covered.

This is no different than paying for car insurance, homeowners, medical, fire, etc.... You have the power of a large number of people paying in to support the cost of your expenses. We pay for these types of insurance all the time. We tell people they are stupid to not have insurance (car, medical, home, fire) in case something bad happens. But we figure we'll just "pull out the money" to hire a lawyer and pay legal fees if we are involved in a shooting. Seems kind of silly actually.

[thebearpack]

This seems like a relatively new thing? Or at least maybe not too popular or common yet? I'm pretty "into" guns and never heard of it.

With that in mind, here's a serious question for our resident legal types: if someone with this insurance were involved in a shooting that was maybe slightly less than a clear-cut case of self defense, would the opposing lawyer be able to successfully use it against the person to paint him/her as a gun nut? Something like "Mr. Jones, I see you had this Use of Force insurance; were you planning to go around shooting people?". I know it's ridiculous but think of it in terms of 12 jurors who may never have held a gun before and even if any of them were gun owners, they probably never heard of this insurance and might think it's "extreme". Just curious.

[olderguy]

www.armedcitizensnetwork.org


Hope I never need to use it.

[sbmania]

I've looked at those but my gut feeling is a big impersonal company like that is probably not going to work as hard on your behalf as a private firm that you have hired. Especially if the circumstances around the use of force are in any way even slightly ambiguous.
I've been carrying concealed for more than 20 years and have never needed to use a firearm in self-defense. Hopefully, I will go to my grave many years from now still having never needed to pull my firearm against an attacker. But life being what it is, I recognize that my hopes in this area might not be realized.
I've never needed an criminal attorney before so I'm not sure of proper protocol. But for me, I have put Gunlawyer's phone number on my cell phone speed dial. The plan is, in the relatively unlikely case I find myself in a defensive shooting situation, is to either call him myself, or have my wife call him, pay his fees, whatever they happen to be, and hopefully have him develop a great legal defense for my circumstances.
I don't know for sure, but it seems a guy like me doesn't really need to have a lawyer on retainer for a defensive shooting anymore than I should carry a special insurance policy against a meteor strike on my house. I recognize that I am probably far more likely to get mugged than hit by a meteor, but with situational awareness, de-escalation, avoidance of bad situations, etc, I can hopefully minimize these risks. In any case, these are my current plans until something better comes along.

[God's Country]

I understand your point. But you can say the same about homeowners insurance, medical, car, etc..... Just save up your money just in case. You don't have to pay for those stupid insurance premiums. But if that time comes. I'm betting you don't have the money "saved up" to cover all your cost. Most of us would be surprised how little our homeowners actually covers. I called and found out NONE of my expensive toys (bikes, guns, etc) are really covered much at all unless they are in my house. Once you leave the house with them, they are no longer covered.

This is no different than paying for car insurance, homeowners, medical, fire, etc.... You have the power of a large number of people paying in to support the cost of your expenses. We pay for these types of insurance all the time. We tell people they are stupid to not have insurance (car, medical, home, fire) in case something bad happens. But we figure we'll just "pull out the money" to hire a lawyer and pay legal fees if we are involved in a shooting. Seems kind of silly actually.

We're talking about your freedom not a few shingles blown off of your house, or a collision. You better read the fine print carefully because I'll bet if the shooting is questionable by any stretch they will try not to pay out. We're talking about criminal law that is as convoluted as it gets. Would your insurance have covered George Zimmermen?