Carry Insurance Washington State

[Jammersix]

I was reading the Times this afternoon when I read this article:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattl...e-coverage-for-shootings-in-washington-state/

On one hand, I see Washington's position. The way the article is written, I could buy their insurance policy, then use a gun to go out and commit an armed robbery, and then because I used a gun, the cost of my defense is covered. (The only requirement in the article is that the use of the weapon be deliberate.) So yes, in that instance, Washington's law is doing a good thing by stopping the sale of insurance that would appear to cover a felon's defense.

Then in the last sentence in the article, they mention that another insurance agency has been fined for selling "similar..." insurance from the NRA.

Which raises the question is the NRA's carry insurance illegal in Washington State?

Is there a legal version of the NRA's policies? Does anyone really know?

 

[RETG]

Do no carry NRA insurance, cannot read the article since my firewall won't allow me to and I don't feel like turning it off; however, from my reading of the exclusions for this type of insurance, they have all excluded ILLEGAL activity. In other words if you rob a store and shoot someone, the insurance is NOT going to defend you. If you are in a self-defense situation it will.
But there is fine print on any insurance policy that should be read.

 

[Jammersix]

Not what the article is about. My example was poorly worded; but the article went in a different direction.

One of the problems appears to be that guilt or innocence can't be determined beforehand.

 

[gunlaw]

I believe the concealed carry insurance only pays if your case is successfully defended.

 

[Jammersix]

I believe the concealed carry insurance only pays if your case is successfully defended.

Which policy? Do you have a citation, I'd like to read it.

 

[gunlaw]

Carry guard is one that provides reimbursement. That may be changing. Be sure to read the policy before you decide which to buy.

 

[Dfwkid]

Some of those policies provide an attorney for criminal defense which NY state didn't like when it forbade the NRA coverage. I believe WA is the same way. They don't believe gunowners should have proper defense when accused of murder/manslaughter. All policies cover only lawful use of a firearm.

 

[Kendahl]

Anyone who says self defense insurance is murder insurance is either ignorant or lying in his teeth. All the programs do is provide you with a good (i.e. expensive) lawyer whom most people can't afford or would bankrupt themselves paying. There are two safeguards to prevent criminals from misusing self defense insurance.

The first is that insurers will reject claims that don't meet their own standards for legal self defense. ACLDN is completely up front about this. Every claim is reviewed by a committee. (Given the reputations of the members, if they don't believe it was self defense, you might as well plead guilty.)

The second is that, even if you have a lawyer paid for by the insurer, a prosecutor who sincerely believes in your guilt still can put you on trial. He will have to make a good case rather than railroad you. In my opinion, that's what all the fuss is about.

 

[Jammersix]

I think one of the points is that they don't provide you with anything until and unless you're shown to be innocent.

That means you face the justice system alone.

 

[Grumulkin]

I have a policy through USCCA as it was recommended by a retired but very experienced police officer. Fortunately, I've never had occasion to need it but from what I understand they do put up money up front for your defense with a very competent attorney if you're so unfortunate as to need it.

 

[Jammersix]

Then what, they ask for it back if you're convicted?

I doubt it.

 

[Warp]

Then what, they ask for it back if you're convicted?

I doubt it.

I also doubt they ask for it back

 

[Kendahl]

Then what, they ask for it back if you're convicted?

I doubt it.

That's why they review cases before committing themselves.

USCCA is being sued by one of its clients because, after providing initial support, they backed out. I haven't seen any details but I wouldn't be surprised if, after taking a good look at the evidence, they decided it wasn't legitimate self defense.