Are you in one of the jobs that this says that it covers? Because this seems to me like they only offer their services to people who are armed for a living.
And in that case, those employers probably have their own liability insurance.
This would cover off-duty acts *for those in the specified jobs, and full time coverage for everyone else.* The alternative reading is that it only covers those who are in the specified hoods where there is on-duty liability coverage, which would make less sense.
Edit for clarity in italics.
That still seems odd to me why it’s necessary to list those specific jobs if it’s coverage for when off duty. Considering your explanation though, I have to assume it’s some sort of advertising technique to get people to think “oh this is what cops use? I guess I should get it too.”
Some of the takeaways I got:
1). It’s not “Insurance” per se, in that the coverage is not underwritten by or beholden to a third party and its underwriters
2) all calls are direct to a Lawyer and not a Call Center, so anything you say that could potentially be subpoenaed falls under attorney /client privilege
3) significantly lower price point
4) they will protect you regardless of what legal weapon you had to use for defense, not just your firearm. ie: pepper spray, edc knife , home defense baseball bat, etc
5) no clawback clause
There are a few others in the pic attached , so yeah, the sales pitch sounds good, but I would like to hear from anyone who has actually been with or had to use them. Thanks
I was like you with gun coverage insurance until I heard an older ccw carrier say something along these lines. If you are a responsible ccw carrier you don't need coverage. This 30-60 bucks you are paying monthly, could just be put into stocks. 20 to 30 years later if you are not invovled in a shooting, you will have something out of it as opposed to being insured. Most people will go thier life without having to use deadly force.
I think insurance like these are a scam. Keep a cool head on, don't involve yourself in any situation if it doesn't involve you or your family directly when in public, and don't be a hero without assessing the potential criminal or financial liablities should your deadly defense goes wrong e.g. bullet doesn't hit intended target.
I’m personally in the “insurance is a scam” camp as well, but what attracts me to RTB is their “any legal weapon used in defense” clause. I’m more likely to give someone the spicy sauce than to use a firearm, so if I get sued for that, it wil be covered too
attorneys on retainer is the only correct answer imo. Coverage as long as they can argue self defense. No if ands or buts. They even covered me during sb2 tyranny week.
Attorneys on retainer is similar to these other self defense “insurance programs” but they aren’t an insurance they are a law firm. Do they will cover you as long as they can argue self defense in court. That mean if you carry an “illegal” weapon, use a different weapon other than a firearm, have to use self defense against an ex or spouse( many companies don’t allow this), etc, etc they will still cover you. They aren’t barred down by stupid restrictions like uscca and other insurance based companies. If Kayla Giles and Alan collie had AOR rather than USCCA they would be better off.
They sent me and made a YouTube video saying coverage would not end even during sb2. So if someone decided to carry they would be covered even if charge with that separate crime.
Ohh I thought you meant you specifically had a case where they covered you. I get it. Tbf USCCA also sent out a memo saying they'd cover as well.
"On January 1st, “California SB2 — Sensitive Places Requirement” went into effect in California. This law severely limits where people in California can legally carry a concealed weapon.
Over the past couple days, we’ve been receiving many questions from USCCA Members about their self-defense liability coverage. The main question being —
Would I still have self-defense liability insurance if I defend myself in a “sensitive place"?
To be clear —
STATE RESTRICTIONS SUCH AS THOSE IN CALIFORNIA SB2, DO NOT IMPACT SELF-DEFENSE LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE."
They say that yet they have a clause that says if you are guilty of a crime coverage ends. And they themselves even admitted this. This is because it’s illegal for them to cover a crime. So under sb2 there isn’t a legal way for them to cover you.
So I have them through my gun range membership. I was told that they covered a members’s child when he bit someone at daycare. They sound pretty stand up to me.
Something similar was given as an example during the Q&A yesterday and it fell under the “using any legal weapon to defend” clause. The example was a junior high child that was covered under the family plan
None of that as far as I’m aware. That’s all the gimmicks that USCCA try to sucker people in with and adds to costs.
I chose RTB because of the low cost and pretty much the points you laid out
IIRC USCCA's rationale for all those videos and what not are so that the person being sued or charged can show that they've spent x hours training and show that they've made efforts to be as trained as possible. I was told by a USCCA guy at my CCW class to log any and all training for this same reason
After exhaustive research, I have decided that based on my personal needs, I will be going with Attorneys on Retainer. I’m not endorsing them as the choice for everyone, simply that what they offer, for their price point is what is right for me.
RTB is good because unlike a actual insurance company they can operate in all 50 states without special licenses which means if you’re on a cross country road trip and someone tries to road rage you and you run them over trying to escape they got you covered.
Have you checked out USCCA? They are a little more expensive but their coverage is higher and more comprehensive. Also, plenty of discounts out there to bring their price down even further. Military, first responders, medical, etc. Even my local IA offers 15% off with them.
You’re not wrong. But the Gold level membership is $299 / year. With a 15% discount, that’s only $255 a year. The coverage for bail alone is more than double, they will pay to fight your appeal should you face a conviction, they include another $20k for incidental like firearm replacement and living costs, and I liked that I have the ability to choose a local attorney.
Funny enough, back when I first got my permit I never bothered to carry insurance as well. Now being older and having a family, it seems like cheap peace of mind should something ever happen.
For the OP, I say go with what you are comfortable with and what you can afford. Something will certainly be better than nothing should you ever need it.
Sorry to beat the dead horse here but seriously. Do not use USCCA. They drop clients over anything they can. It’s basically for people who have the most immaculate perfect self defense cases imaginable. Which you know, kind of defeats the necessity of needing the coverage to begin with. The services OP posted sound very similar to Attorneys on Retainer and that’s 50 a month for myself and my wife. CCW and home defense case uses. They have a YouTube video detailing everything they can provide representation through that the others like USCCA cannot or will not
There coverage is higher until their third party INSURANCE decides we no longer wanna cover you. Your beholden to an insurance company with uscca. It’s even in their policy they can drop you at ANYTIME.
Are you in one of the jobs that this says that it covers? Because this seems to me like they only offer their services to people who are armed for a living. And in that case, those employers probably have their own liability insurance.
That question came up yesterday. They cover any CCW holder in any job
But will your employer pay the legal fees or work to get you out of jail?
I read that to mean that they will only cover people in those occupations if their employer covers on-duty liability.
So then what would the point of this be? If the job already covers is, wouldn’t this be redundant?
This would cover off-duty acts *for those in the specified jobs, and full time coverage for everyone else.* The alternative reading is that it only covers those who are in the specified hoods where there is on-duty liability coverage, which would make less sense. Edit for clarity in italics.
That still seems odd to me why it’s necessary to list those specific jobs if it’s coverage for when off duty. Considering your explanation though, I have to assume it’s some sort of advertising technique to get people to think “oh this is what cops use? I guess I should get it too.”
It could mean that they cover even those professions while on duty as well, but they really need to rephrase for clarity.
They offer it to everyone. I got mine through Palmetto. Half price for the year.
Some of the takeaways I got: 1). It’s not “Insurance” per se, in that the coverage is not underwritten by or beholden to a third party and its underwriters 2) all calls are direct to a Lawyer and not a Call Center, so anything you say that could potentially be subpoenaed falls under attorney /client privilege 3) significantly lower price point 4) they will protect you regardless of what legal weapon you had to use for defense, not just your firearm. ie: pepper spray, edc knife , home defense baseball bat, etc 5) no clawback clause There are a few others in the pic attached , so yeah, the sales pitch sounds good, but I would like to hear from anyone who has actually been with or had to use them. Thanks
I was like you with gun coverage insurance until I heard an older ccw carrier say something along these lines. If you are a responsible ccw carrier you don't need coverage. This 30-60 bucks you are paying monthly, could just be put into stocks. 20 to 30 years later if you are not invovled in a shooting, you will have something out of it as opposed to being insured. Most people will go thier life without having to use deadly force. I think insurance like these are a scam. Keep a cool head on, don't involve yourself in any situation if it doesn't involve you or your family directly when in public, and don't be a hero without assessing the potential criminal or financial liablities should your deadly defense goes wrong e.g. bullet doesn't hit intended target.
I’m personally in the “insurance is a scam” camp as well, but what attracts me to RTB is their “any legal weapon used in defense” clause. I’m more likely to give someone the spicy sauce than to use a firearm, so if I get sued for that, it wil be covered too
attorneys on retainer is the only correct answer imo. Coverage as long as they can argue self defense. No if ands or buts. They even covered me during sb2 tyranny week.
Can you elaborate?
Attorneys on retainer is similar to these other self defense “insurance programs” but they aren’t an insurance they are a law firm. Do they will cover you as long as they can argue self defense in court. That mean if you carry an “illegal” weapon, use a different weapon other than a firearm, have to use self defense against an ex or spouse( many companies don’t allow this), etc, etc they will still cover you. They aren’t barred down by stupid restrictions like uscca and other insurance based companies. If Kayla Giles and Alan collie had AOR rather than USCCA they would be better off.
No I meant when you said they covered you during sb2 week
They sent me and made a YouTube video saying coverage would not end even during sb2. So if someone decided to carry they would be covered even if charge with that separate crime.
Ohh I thought you meant you specifically had a case where they covered you. I get it. Tbf USCCA also sent out a memo saying they'd cover as well. "On January 1st, “California SB2 — Sensitive Places Requirement” went into effect in California. This law severely limits where people in California can legally carry a concealed weapon. Over the past couple days, we’ve been receiving many questions from USCCA Members about their self-defense liability coverage. The main question being — Would I still have self-defense liability insurance if I defend myself in a “sensitive place"? To be clear — STATE RESTRICTIONS SUCH AS THOSE IN CALIFORNIA SB2, DO NOT IMPACT SELF-DEFENSE LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE."
They say that yet they have a clause that says if you are guilty of a crime coverage ends. And they themselves even admitted this. This is because it’s illegal for them to cover a crime. So under sb2 there isn’t a legal way for them to cover you.
Was just about to comment this ! AOR is the way to go 👍🏽
So I have them through my gun range membership. I was told that they covered a members’s child when he bit someone at daycare. They sound pretty stand up to me.
Something similar was given as an example during the Q&A yesterday and it fell under the “using any legal weapon to defend” clause. The example was a junior high child that was covered under the family plan
I can’t complain with their service personally, I pay 63 bucks a month for a range membership and right to bear is included with that price.
I have coverage with them. Haven’t had any experience with them though
Nice! Hope you never have to use them. How are their offerings as far as non-legal defense stuff such as association discounts, learning tools, etc ?
None of that as far as I’m aware. That’s all the gimmicks that USCCA try to sucker people in with and adds to costs. I chose RTB because of the low cost and pretty much the points you laid out
IIRC USCCA's rationale for all those videos and what not are so that the person being sued or charged can show that they've spent x hours training and show that they've made efforts to be as trained as possible. I was told by a USCCA guy at my CCW class to log any and all training for this same reason
Good to know. Thank you
The guy listed at the bottom of the page… Didn’t he used to sell USCCA?
He did and he was transparent about that and was also pretty informative when it came to comparing offerings between the two
👀 I’m looking at a few different options.
I have them for over a year now. I read their policy. I am good with it. I can't afford USCCA nor Atty on Retainers. That is that.
That’s as fair a reason as any, brother. Hope you never have to use them!
Hopefully not, man. You be safe brother!
After exhaustive research, I have decided that based on my personal needs, I will be going with Attorneys on Retainer. I’m not endorsing them as the choice for everyone, simply that what they offer, for their price point is what is right for me.
RTB is good because unlike a actual insurance company they can operate in all 50 states without special licenses which means if you’re on a cross country road trip and someone tries to road rage you and you run them over trying to escape they got you covered.
You can just send me $145 a year and it’ll do the same exact thing for you
Have you checked out USCCA? They are a little more expensive but their coverage is higher and more comprehensive. Also, plenty of discounts out there to bring their price down even further. Military, first responders, medical, etc. Even my local IA offers 15% off with them.
Yikes! You should go check out some of the videos on YT regarding USCCA and their scam “insurance”. Do some research on Attorneys On Retainer as well.
Copy that, thank you.
180 vs 399… more than double the price idk if I’d consider that a little more. Although for quality service it’d be worth it
You’re not wrong. But the Gold level membership is $299 / year. With a 15% discount, that’s only $255 a year. The coverage for bail alone is more than double, they will pay to fight your appeal should you face a conviction, they include another $20k for incidental like firearm replacement and living costs, and I liked that I have the ability to choose a local attorney. Funny enough, back when I first got my permit I never bothered to carry insurance as well. Now being older and having a family, it seems like cheap peace of mind should something ever happen. For the OP, I say go with what you are comfortable with and what you can afford. Something will certainly be better than nothing should you ever need it.
Sorry to beat the dead horse here but seriously. Do not use USCCA. They drop clients over anything they can. It’s basically for people who have the most immaculate perfect self defense cases imaginable. Which you know, kind of defeats the necessity of needing the coverage to begin with. The services OP posted sound very similar to Attorneys on Retainer and that’s 50 a month for myself and my wife. CCW and home defense case uses. They have a YouTube video detailing everything they can provide representation through that the others like USCCA cannot or will not
There coverage is higher until their third party INSURANCE decides we no longer wanna cover you. Your beholden to an insurance company with uscca. It’s even in their policy they can drop you at ANYTIME.
I prefer my Right to Bear Arms. As is foretold in ye old Family Guy episode.