Who do we like for "carry insurance"?

[HCountyGuy]

So my family and I just moved up to the metro-Atlanta area from Columbus. While Columbus was getting bad, I recognize the likelihood of me possibly having to shoot some shitbag is now significantly increased. Hell there were two reported defensive gun uses in our new neck of the woods about a week or two back (no shots fired). Not to mention, apparently a significant drug neighborhood isn't terribly far down the road.

With all this in mind, some sort of "carry insurance" is becoming more a priority than before.

So, who do we like?

I've done some research on USCCA and Armed Citizen's Legal Defense Network, but wanted to check with the knowledgeable folks here. Any personal experiences are certainly welcome.

Thank you in advance!

[s0nspark]

I have been quite happy with the ACLDN. Affordable, sensible insurance IMO.

[blues]

I have a federal LEOSA policy but I've backed it with ACLDN.

ACLDN just hit the right spot with me via the people associated with it, the message, the materials and the coverage. I purchased a three year membership and it's well worth the money imho.

[octagon]

My personal likes are ACLDF and USCCA but they key is to read each companies policy and coverage. Things you may want to consider are whether the policy refunds you or pays up front, what coverage in each area,does the policy cover civil and criminal and to what extent and amounts,does the coverage apply if you don't use a firearm, are you covered with any amount of alcohol in your system(even well below any legal impaired limit as in one single drink) The policy needs to fit you and your situation.

[11B10]

Because I'm totally inept at attaching links, I'll just tell you to find and read Marty Hayes' piece about this on ACLDN's website. It'll answer all your questions.

[blues]

Because I'm totally inept at attaching links, I'll just tell you to find and read Marty Hayes' piece about this on ACLDN's website. It'll answer all your questions.

ACLDN (https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/learn/membership-benefits)

[Hambo]

Another ACLDN client.

[LittleLebowski]

Tag for data.

[Pepper]

I'm planning to sign up with CCW Safe. It looks like they offer the most comprehensive package.

[Francis]

ACLDN

I like the education emphasis, the people running it and the proactive involvement in cases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatypo

[Drang]

How many of the people running USCCA, Carry Guard, CCW Safe (which I just heard of for the first time) or any of the other programs are members here?

The folks who run ACLDN are P-F.com members.

Should their membership in Pistol-forum.com be a factor in the decision? That's up to you.

[blues]

How many of the people running USCCA, Carry Guard, CCW Safe (which I just heard of for the first time) or any of the other programs are members here?

The folks who run ACLDN are P-F.com members.

Should their membership in Pistol-forum.com be a factor in the decision? That's up to you.

I think their membership here and level of participation may speak to their character and competence but ultimately the program has to stand on its merits.

More than the "brass" being members here, all of whom I respect and admire, I think the folks that comprise the membership speak volumes as well. (With the same proviso mentioned above.)

For me personally it came down to the culture of the organization, their policies, the emphasis on educational materials, and the knowledge and the quality of the staff and membership. They are one of us. We are one of them...and ultimately the price was fair for the promises made.

[PT Doc]

ACLDN

I like the education emphasis, the people running it and the proactive involvement in cases.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatypoI chose ACLDN for the same reasons

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Tooln]

I carry both ACLDN and US Lawshield currently. I suspect I will not be renewing US Lawshield. I will be investigating CCWSafe, but I will not drop ACLDN regardless. Any two of the three listed programs is about $300 total yearly. I can live with that.

[willie]

Thanks for the information. I plan to join ACLDN now that it's recommended here.

[Tooln]

I carry both ACLDN and US Lawshield currently. I suspect I will not be renewing US Lawshield. I will be investigating CCWSafe, but I will not drop ACLDN regardless. Any two of the three listed programs is about $300 total yearly. I can live with that.Got to thinking I might actually explain my choices...
Got US Lawshield due to their presence at my CCW permit class about 3 years ago here in Oklahoma. They supply a "program attorney" available on an emergency basis 24/7. You can also speak with a program attorney on a non emergency basis. I've called and spoken with one several times and been quite pleased with not only the speed that my non emergency calls were returned, but also with the thoroughly expressed answers. In short I've been pleased with them personally. They offer online education, local seminars (these are really sales pitch things, but decent in any case) and more. I have no complaints with the program, service, or cost. I have no affiliation other than as a customer.

ACLDN, has been covered in depth already. The collective board, are folks I want on my side if I ever have to use my weapon. The training materials and information provided is excellent and extensive. Again, no affiliation other than being a customer, and also a student of at least one board member(this did not specifically influence my decision to join).

I mentioned a potential move to CCWSAFE. First they are based here in OKC, and I hear good things from people I respect. I need to do much more research before I would feel comfortable saying anything else. Again, no affiliation personally, however I work for Keepers Concealment and we are an affiliate.

[GJM]

Carry insurance, I couldn’t resist — I picked HK.

[Clusterfrack]

ACLDN. Hope I never have to use it.

[Mark D]

CCWSafe for me. Hopefully I'll never find out how good (or not) they actually are.

I will also check out the ACLDN based on the recommendations hereabouts.

[Marty Hayes]

I think their membership here and level of participation may speak to their character and competence but ultimately the program has to stand on its merits.

More than the "brass" being members here, all of whom I respect and admire, I think the folks that comprise the membership speak volumes as well. (With the same proviso mentioned above.)

For me personally it came down to the culture of the organization, their policies, the emphasis on educational materials, and the knowledge and the quality of the staff and membership. They are one of us. We are one of them...and ultimately the price was fair for the promises made.

Bingo ^^^

I started ACLDN back in 2008 for our (armed and trained) culture. When I did so, I enlisted the aid of many of my colleagues and peers in the instructional world. We are a group of serious minded folk to do not cater to outlandish claims of being everything to everybody. And, we don't jack up the price of membership to pay for the outlandish advertising, gun give aways and beautiful spokeswomen in tight t-shirts.

Thank-you everyone for your support and continued membership.

Marty Hayes, President
The Armed Citizen's Legal Defense Network, Inc.

[Grey]

Wanted to bring this back from the dead since it has been almost 2 years since the last post.

Any new updates or opinions to share?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[blues]

I'm in my second year with CCW Safe now. (HR 218 Plan) For me it checks more boxes than others I've been with or researched. Mileage and need will vary.

I have some other coverage via my membership in FLEOA (Federal Law Enforcement Officers Assoc.) which I would use primarily for LEOSA related matters or other incidents outside of self defense specific events. (Though they would provide an attorney to respond if needed.)

[Borderland]

I've had ACLDN for about 5 years. We used travel a lot and I felt like I needed some insurance on the road.

I don't know what's out there these days so I might not be well informed on the subject. I did a lot of research when I purchased ACLDN and it was the best fit for me. I like the way the company is set up and the coverage. It's a Washington company and they have a pretty high bar in this state when it comes to insurance companies.

I still have the insurance and will continue with it. Just be aware they won't cover you if you do something stupid like not keep your carry permit up to date. Happened to me. Let mine lapse once but got it renewed pronto when I realized it.

This state doesn't mail out notices like they do with auto licenses. ;)

[blues]

^^^

I was with ACLDN previously and have nothing but good to say about them...but I wanted civil coverage as well and CCW Safe meant I no longer needed a policy with FEDS...and CCW Safe also provided much broader coverage overall at a better price than combining the two. In fact, it is less expensive than FEDS by itself.

[ScotchMan]

Another year has gone by, I found this thread searching to renew my confidence in my choice. I've been a long time member of ACLDN but have been assistant instructing some Basic Pistol classes in which the primary instructor brings in a US Law Shield rep to pitch to the class. Having sat through the pitch several times now got me thinking about this topic that was previously settled for me.

Things I like about US Law Shield that ACLDN doesn't offer (as far as I know): they provide an attorney if you don't have one. I have called several pro-2A attorneys in my area in an attempt to establish a relationship, but haven't been able to get a call back. So I am still currently attorney-less. I am confident that if I had need, Marty and Co could set me up with someone, but still, its another thing. The other thing I like is that US Law Shield has the previously mentioned number you can call for legal advice at any time, included in your membership. That might be occasionally nice as questions come up that I'd like a second opinion on.

That said, ACLDN has a lot fewer "gotchas" from what I can tell. US Law Shield only covers you in your state, multi-state is another product you can turn on and off at will. As has been covered, I don't like that they try to scare new Basic Pistol students into signing up for a service. There is no mention of the importance of getting more training, or basic legal advice if you do get into a shooting other than to call them and not say anything to the cops.

They did say that they are the ONLY service that gives you a phone number that goes directly to a lawyer, all their competitors go to a call center which is not covered by attorney-client privilege. I smiled to myself knowing that Marty's cell phone number was in my wallet and that the US Law Shield rep is either ignorant or lying.

Regardless I don't think I will ever drop ACLDN but I was starting to think about supplementing with another service. Having read through this thread I think I will drop the topic and stick with what I have. Definitely becoming a more crowded field than when I first signed up for ACLDN back around 2010-2011 though.

[fixer]

ccw safe here. They are pricey but I think the best option.

[blues]

ccw safe here. They are pricey but I think the best option.

I've been with them for a few years now. They were my choice after extensive comparisons with other providers.

[ScotchMan]

I've been with them for a few years now. They were my choice after extensive comparisons with other providers.

Oh wow, are you not with ACLDN anymore? You were one of the passionate voices for them a couple years ago in this thread.

[Guerrero]

ccw safe here. They are pricey but I think the best option.

The basic plan isn't that bad.

[blues]

Oh wow, are you not with ACLDN anymore? You were one of the passionate voices for them a couple years ago in this thread.

ScotchMan

I have no negatives to report regarding ACLDN, it's just that the plan with CCW Safe allows me to consolidate both criminal and civil coverage in one package, whereas in the past I had ACLDN augmented by a policy for retired federal agents which had civil coverage as part of the plan.

Now I only need CCW Safe...and my LEOSA related legal coverage (if needed for statutory purposes) is provided via my long membership of 35+ years in FLEOA, (Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association).

I still think ACLDN is a top notch organization for what it provides.

[ScotchMan]

ScotchMan

I have no negatives to report regarding ACLDN, it's just that the plan with CCW Safe allows me to consolidate both criminal and civil coverage in one package, whereas in the past I had ACLDN augmented by a policy for retired federal agents which had civil coverage as part of the plan.

Now I only need CCW Safe...and my LEOSA related legal coverage (if needed for statutory purposes) is provided via my long membership of 35+ years in FLEOA, (Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association).

I still think ACLDN is a top notch organization for what it provides.

The membership benefits page claims the fund can be used for “unmeritous civil suits” following criminal action. Did you understand differently or is CCW Safe doing something more there?

[blues]

The membership benefits page claims the fund can be used for “unmeritous civil suits” following criminal action. Did you understand differently or is CCW Safe doing something more there?

Things may have changed since I made the switch. I haven't revisited the terms in the past few years.

For my purposes, the CCW Safe LEOSA plan makes the most sense. Mileage will vary with individual needs and pricing considerations.

[RoyGBiv]

Any updated thoughts about CCW Safe vs ACLDN? My renewal is coming up.

https://www.arsenalattorneys.com/blog/comparing-self-defense-insurance-type-products-by-arsenal-attorneys-george-lyon

$309/year, including coverage for wife, who rarely carries (#dontgetmestarted)
https://ccwsafe.com/page/23776

$155/year including spouse.
https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/learn/membership-benefits

[blues]

Former member of ACLDN...

...been with CCW Safe for a few years now, (HR 218 Plan), and haven't looked back.

Nothing wrong with ACLDN, and I had no complaints...just CCW Safe gives me superior protection, (civil / criminal), at a fair price. Peace of mind and all that.

Mileage will vary.

[walker2713]

Thanks to all for a very helpful and informative thread!!

I’ve been carrying (legally) since 1995 and this was an issue I never got around to considering and acting on.

I just signed up with CCWSAFE.

George

[RoyGBiv]

After some back/forth on it, I signed up for CCWSafe instead of renewing with ALCDN.
It was a tough decision letting go of some experts at ALCDN and paying the higher cost, but, I believe the coverage is better, although I hope to never need it.

On the cost side... my post above was not correct... Here's the corrected numbers... See links above to compare coverages.

ALCDN: Renewal $155, covers spouse.

CCWSafe:
Defender/Base plan : $209 + $100 (spouse, criminal only) + $220 (Civil Liability coverage for primary member only)
Ultimate plan: $519 (includes civil liab for member only, includes spouse coverage for criminal defense only) + $220 adds civil coverage for spouse.
Less 10% using Prdator discount code KC10off (Thanks!)

[Clusterfrack]

My understanding is that ACLDN provides support for criminal and civil cases (https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/learn/membership-benefits).

"Network members also have access to additional funding from the Network's Legal Defense Fund for legal expenses of defending against unmeritorious prosecution or civil law suit after a self-defense incident occuring during their period of membership."

Other than support for the spouse, does CCW Safe provide better coverage?

[RoyGBiv]

https://ccwsafe.com/page/plan-comparison

https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/learn/support-plan-comparison (lots of words... not my fault)

Good comparison here: https://www.arsenalattorneys.com/blog/comparing-self-defense-insurance-type-products-by-arsenal-attorneys-george-lyon

[Clusterfrack]

I have an umbrella policy, that I think would cover civil liability, so ACLDNs coverage would be adequate.

[RoyGBiv]

I have an umbrella policy, that I think would cover civil liability, so ACLDNs coverage would be adequate.

Suggest that you speak with your insurance company about that. Better yet, if it's not specifically addressed in your policy documents, get it in writing. I've read several umbrella policies that vary from definitely not covered, to, not clearly a yes. Never read one that clearly covered self defense outside of the home.

[blues]

Suggest that you speak with your insurance company about that. Better yet, if it's not specifically addressed in your policy documents, get it in writing. I've read several umbrella policies that vary from definitely not covered, to, not clearly a yes. Never read one that clearly covered self defense outside of the home.

I spoke with my insurance company rep about the language in our umbrella policy, and though she was an attorney and agreed with my interpretation, she wouldn't say definitively whether the company would interpret the language the same way, since it was not within her discretion to rule on the matter.

So, rather than chance it, I chose to elect the additional coverage that CCW Safe afforded.

[RoyGBiv]

This is as close to a YES as I've seen in an umbrella policy.... from an AMICA policy from 2015... Trying to get my hands on my current policy document that's gone MIA at the moment..

The key, if you're reading your policy, is usually in the exclusions section....


A. The coverages provided by this policy do not apply to:
1. "Bodily injury" or "property damage"
which is expected or intended by an "insured" even if the resulting "bodily injury" or "property damage":
a. Is of a different kind, quality or degree than initially expected or intended; or

b. Is sustained by a different person, entity, real or personal property, than expected or intended.

However, this Exclusion (A.1.) does not apply to:

a. "Bodily injury" resulting from the use of reasonable force by an "insured" to protect persons or property; or

b. "Bodily injury" or "property damage" resulting from the use of reasonable force by an "insured" to prevent or eliminate danger in the operation of "autos", "recreational motor vehicles" or watercraft;


So.... My umbrella insurance company gets to decide what is "reasonable force".. Good luck with that.
Maybe I'll have enough cash left over to fight with them after I finish paying the lawyer to defend my civil suit.
TX law provides protection against Civil suits arising from self defense.... but... you still have to pay the man to argue for dismissal and count on a judge to agree.

Most policies I've seen (over 25 years of buying them... I am not an insurance guy) exclude "intentional acts", somewhere in their language.
You can assess the risk and decide if you need additional civil coverage that specifically includes self defense. There's not a wrong answer, just a right-for-you answer.

[blues]

My policy and the rep I spoke with is also with Amica. I don't feel like dealing with it at the moment as I'm pretty tired from a night of bad storms and no power...but as I recall, and the rep agreed with me, the language did not preclude covering self-defense when all of the provisos, exemptions and other b.s. were taken into account.

I still wouldn't want to find out at an inopportune time that they had a differing opinion...hence my actions as stated above.

[the Schwartz]

My policy and the rep I spoke with is also with Amica. I don't feel like dealing with it at the moment as I'm pretty tired from a night of bad storms and no power...but as I recall, and the rep agreed with me, the language did not preclude covering self-defense when all of the provisos, exemptions and other b.s. were taken into account.

I still wouldn't want to find out at an inopportune time that they had a differing opinion...hence my actions as stated above.

Last year, based on your reported experiences here, I also went with the CCW Safe HR 218 policy. The price is reasonable for all that they cover and having coverage consolidated in one policy is nice to have. A belated thanks to you.

[blues]

Last year, based on your reported experiences here, I also went with the CCW Safe HR 218 policy. The price is reasonable for all that they cover and having coverage consolidated in one policy is nice to have. A belated thanks to you.

You are most welcome, my friend.

[JohnO]

Resurrecting due to my concern that I should re-establish coverage. I signed on with CCW Safe when they 1st started. I paid $500 for 5 years of coverage. When my renewal time arrived their rates had drastically increased. The coverage I had for $100/Yr had gone to $500. I threw caution to the wind and let the coverage lapse.

The interesting thing was that over those 5 years I never heard a peep from CCW Safe. Not that I expected them to hold my hand. I just began to wonder what I really had with zero communication. Then close to my renewal time I received a plastic membership card. Then CCW Safe ramped up their communication via email. I still get regular emails even though I haven't been a member for a few years now.

When I passed the renewal date without renewing I got a nice letter with a phone number for and an offer to call Mike Darter (The CEO) directly. I didn't.

Doing some minimal looking at coverages it appears the CCW Safe it the top provider in the field. With things devolving everywhere I'm starting to think that the likelihood of being involved in an 'incident' has increased and continues to increase. I have a $2M umbrella rider on my homeowners policy but I've consistently heard that it only covers accidents not willful torts.

Retirement is on the horizon. I've worked for a long time, lived frugally and don't want to see the fruits of my labor vanish because I just wanted to survive a situation and continue to care for my loved ones.

I've also read that having CCW type insurance can be an insulator from prosecution. As a read a DA may think twice about pursuing an individual with resources to mount a vigorous defense, especially when it will not leave them penniless.

I am concerned about some of the clauses and fine print that could negate one's coverage. For example: your coverage could be voided if you are involved in a defensive use of a firearm in a location where the firearm was prohibited. More and more laws are being passed making certain places off limits. Some of which one would never know about until its too late. Certain municipal ordinances ban weapons in public parks. Many have no clue. Or one could chose to ignore at their own peril. Perhaps the municipality would not bring charges (doctrine of competing harms) but one's insureror could walk away from you when the perpetrator/saint's family brings a wrongful death civil suit.

[RoyGBiv]

I am concerned about some of the clauses and fine print that could negate one's coverage. For example: your coverage could be voided if you are involved in a defensive use of a firearm in a location where the firearm was prohibited. More and more laws are being passed making certain places off limits. Some of which one would never know about until its too late. Certain municipal ordinances ban weapons in public parks. Many have no clue. Or one could chose to ignore at their own peril. Perhaps the municipality would not bring charges (doctrine of competing harms) but one's insureror could walk away from you when the perpetrator/saint's family brings a wrongful death civil suit.

You should call/email and ask for details... Try to be specific about where your concerns lie.

I had a question about carrying under some specific circumstance and received a "yes you're covered" reply from them... FWIW.