Videos tagged with Self-Defense Coverage

This video details the newly launched program by Attorneys on Retainer (AO), focusing on enhanced legal protection for firearm owners. It clarifies that existing members must re-enroll to access new features, which include coverage for red flag laws and civil liabilities up to $100,000. The program emphasizes that decisions on coverage are made solely by Attorneys for Freedom, with minimal exclusions as long as self-defense can be asserted in good faith.

This video critically analyzes the USCCA's program promises and compares it to alternative legal defense services, specifically "Attorneys on Retainer." The speaker, Instructor Mike, expresses concerns about USCCA's alleged failure to deliver on coverage and highlights the importance of local attorneys with established relationships within the criminal justice system. He scrutinizes specific cases cited by USCCA and "Attorneys on Retainer," questioning the depth of their legal expertise and track record. The discussion emphasizes the need for proven legal wins and local connections for effective self-defense representation.

This video details the Armed Scholar's decision to end his affiliation with USCCA due to unmet program promises regarding self-defense coverage. He highlights specific cases where USCCA allegedly failed to provide promised legal support. The speaker introduces Attorneys on Retainer (AOR) as a new partner, emphasizing their direct legal representation, attorney-client privilege, and broader coverage without insurance exclusions.

The speaker, a former USCCA contractor, explains his departure due to dissatisfaction with USCCA's handling of two specific self-defense cases: Kayla Giles and Austin Cooley. He highlights concerns about USCCA dropping coverage prematurely and not providing clear answers. He has since partnered with Attorneys on Retainer (AOR), praising their immediate attorney-client privilege, comprehensive coverage for various scenarios including prohibited persons and gun-free zones, and their operational model as a law firm rather than an insurance company.

This video features an interview with Rachel Moss, an attorney from Attorneys on Retainer, discussing self-defense legal coverage. The service acts as a legal protection program, not insurance, covering legal fees, bail bonds up to $50,000, firearm replacement, and scene cleanup for members involved in self-defense incidents. They emphasize direct attorney access via a 24/7 hotline and cover a wide range of scenarios, including those with expired permits or alcohol consumption, differentiating themselves from traditional insurance-based programs.

This video emphasizes the importance of legal protection for firearm owners who may need to use their weapon in self-defense. It introduces 'Right to Bear,' an association offering comprehensive legal coverage, including 24/7 attorney access, civil and criminal defense, and bail bond reimbursement. The speaker highlights the benefits of this association model over traditional insurance, focusing on upfront payment and unlimited coverage.

Perry Orth, Vice President of Right to Bear, discusses the company's unique approach to self-defense coverage, emphasizing it's an association, not an insurance company. He highlights benefits like legal services for emergency and non-emergency situations, educational resources, and a nationwide network of pro-2A attorneys. The discussion addresses common criticisms regarding coverage denial, the cost of legal defense including expert witnesses, and the company's commitment to supporting members through complex legal challenges, even in cases with gray areas.

This video features a debate between Bren from Langley Outdoors Academy and Dan from Heavy Duty Country regarding the US Concealed Carry Association (USCCA). They discuss the USCCA's services, contract terms, and specific cases like Alan Coley and Kayla Giles. The conversation highlights differing perspectives on USCCA's transparency, policy interpretations, and the overall value proposition for gun owners seeking legal defense. Both participants aim to inform viewers about the complexities of self-defense coverage in the firearms community.

This video from Washington Gun Law TV discusses the potential for significant civilian disarmament legislation in Colorado, drawing parallels to laws enacted in Washington State. It highlights common legislative proposals from gun control advocates, such as assault weapon bans, high-capacity magazine bans, and new permitting requirements, warning that these measures could be detrimental to responsible gun owners. The speaker urges Colorado citizens to contact their legislators to oppose these changes.

This video, presented by William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, critically examines the Illinois FOID card system, labeling it a 'sham.' It delves into the legal implications of the US v. Carbajal-Flores case, which challenged the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5) regarding firearm possession by illegal aliens. The discussion highlights the perceived overreach of state firearm regulations and contrasts them with fundamental rights.

This video, presented by Tom Grieve, a defense attorney with extensive experience representing USCCA members, debunks five common misconceptions about USCCA membership. Grieve clarifies that USCCA is a membership organization, not an insurer, and that its insurance is provided by Universal Fire and Casualty Insurance Company. He explains that coverage is triggered by lawful acts of self-defense and extends to criminal defense, including bail, and that policy language does not violate attorney-client privilege. The expert instruction emphasizes transparency and confidence for responsible firearm owners.

This video discusses the critical importance of concealed carry insurance and the nuances of coverage, particularly regarding the appellate process and the quality of legal representation. It highlights that not all insurance providers offer the same level of support, with some potentially not covering appeals or only offering reimbursement after a case is won. The discussion emphasizes the need for thorough due diligence when selecting a provider, focusing on their track record, the vetting of their attorneys, and the specific terms of their policies to ensure comprehensive protection.